2014 (5) TMI 1058

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the outset, the parties are in unison that these sixteen cases involve an identical issue of deduction u/s 80P2(a)(i) of the Act. Thus, we take up I.T.A.No.402/Mds/2014 as the 'lead' case. 2. The assessee is a primary agricultural co-operative credit society. At the first instance, it had not filed its return. On 18.3.2010, the Assessing Officer issued section 148 notice. On 25.11.2010, the assessee filed its return declaring ` nil as income after claiming deduction u/s 80P. The same was 'summarily' processed. 3. In 'scrutiny', the Assessing Officer noticed the assessee to have advanced crop loans, deposit loans, jewel loans, KCC jewel loans, SHG loans, etc. For jewel loans of ` 254.72 lakhs, the rate of interest was 12.5%. Per Assessing ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....decision reported in 303 ITR 185 which is a fallacy in logic and law. Also his reference to 249 ITR 330 is misplaced . 4. The learned CIT(A) erred in not following 242 ITR 440 and 102 ITR138 of Madras High Court, by which the Auditors created by TN Co-op. Societies Act are incompetent to interpret against section 2(16) of that Act. 5. The learned CIT(A) failed to note that as per Supreme Court decision in 199 ITR 996 that the Audit is not competent to interpret legal position. 6. The learned CIT(A) erred in not following the Madras ITAT decision in Trichy District Central Co-operative Bank. 7. The learned CIT(A) should have reduced the Statutory Reserves that are mandated out of profits to funds which go out of the coffers of th....