2015 (11) TMI 986

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ainst not allowing the deduction of dividend income under section 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and thereby sustaining the addition of Rs. 17,15,705. 2. The learned Assessing Officer observed that the assessee filed original return declaring income of Rs. 26,02,280 on September 29, 2008, which was revised on March 29, 2010 declaring nil income. The case was scrutinised under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act). The learned Assessing Officer gave a show-cause notice on claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act which was replied by the assessee on dividend received by the bank. It was submitted by the assessee as under : (a) That it is having advances to the rural people, agro sector directl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....k : 4. Since the bank is not a primary bank hence deduction is not available to the bank. Accordingly, he disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act at Rs. 17,15,705. 5. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who had confirmed the addition by considering that section 80P(4) of the Act and held that section 80P(4) is available to : "(1) Primary agricultural credit society. (2) Primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank. Now the assessee is not a co-operative society. The assessee is a co- operative bank. Let us see whether it is covered by definition of 'pr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ction 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act. Addition of Rs. 17,15,705 is confirmed." 6. On the date of hearing, the assessee filed the adjournment application but number of adjournments had already been granted in this case. Therefore, the same is decided after considering the submission made by the assessee. At the outset the learned Departmental representative vehemently supported the order of the learned Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) 7. We have heard the learned Departmental representative and perused the material available on the record. In the original return, the assessee has not claimed deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act but claimed in the revised return. He also enclosed the copy of the object of the co-operati....