Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2018 (5) TMI 1600

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iew of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd vs ACIT, in CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10245 OF 2017(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO. 20044 OF 2015) Order dated August 8, 2017. Therefore, the Bench proceeded to hear and dispose of the same considering the material available on record and submissions of ld D.R. 3. Ground Nos.1 & 6 are general in nature and, hence requires no separate adjudication by us. 4. Ground Nos.2 & 3 are as under: "2. For that ld PCIT is highly unjustified in passing order u/s.263 treating the assessment order u/s.143(3) of the I.T.Act, dated 22.11.2013 passed by the Assessing Officer as erroneous in so fr as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue on the arbitra....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as held that Banking Business is a wide term and includes many activities like discounting bills, hundies, cheque accepting deposits and advancing loans etc. thus it includes providing of credit facility. A Society may not be a banker in the wide sense yet he may be providing credit facility which is a part of banking business. The expression providing credit facility does takes its color from the activity of banking. In order that banking or providing of credit facility may constitute a business, it is necessary that these activities must be chief source of income. The similar view has given by Hon'ble Madras High Court in Rodier Mill Employees Co.op. Stores vs CIT (1982) reported in 135 ITR 355 (Mad) and Hon'ble Kerala High Court....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....irregularity on the same. g) Copy of Inspection Report of NABARD dated 31.3.2011 is submitted. h) Copy of licence no RPCD (Ran)/10/2012-13 dated 24.8.2012 is submitted herewith granted a license to commerce and carry on banking business. From the above, it is apparent that the assessee is carrying on business of banking or providing credit facilities to its members and is eligible for deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T.Act, 1961. TDS has been deducted under TAN RCT00305E on the amount paid during the year and accordingly TDS return was filed vide receipt No. GMVXBMBG. Copy of the status of TDS statement is enclosed. 6. I have gone through the submission and record. It is observed that the asse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mbers and not entitled to exemption u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T.Act, 1961. The case of UP Cooperative can Union (1978) 114 ITR 60(All) is with reference to provisions of sec. 81 for assessment year 1964-65 and says that selling goods on credit does not become business of providing credit facilities. 6.4 With effect from 1.4.2007 the section 80P has been amended and sub-section (4) is inserted whereby no Cooperative Bank is eligible to claim the deduction under section 80P other than a primary agricultural credit society or a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank. 7. And as is observed, the assessee is a cooperative bank, the exclusion clause (4) of section 80P is operative in the assessee's....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....with the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd(supra). Hence, we confirm the order of the Pr. CIT and dismiss both the grounds of appeal of the assessee. 8. Ground Nos.4 and 5 read as under: "4. For that the Pr. CIT is not justified in directing to disallow the professional fee of Rs. 7,29,188/- for want of TDS u/s.194J as the same has been disclosed and taken into the taxable income by the payee. Hence, as per provisions of section 40(a)(ia) the amount is not liable to be disallowed. 5. For that ld Pr. CIT is not justified in directing to disallow Rs. 43,951/- u/s.36(1)(va) as it is allowable u/s.43B as per the order of Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court." 9. We find that t....