TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 287
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....einafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: "(1) That on facts, and in law, the learned CIT has grievously erred in assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. (2) That on facts, and in law, the proceedings u/s 263 are void as the original assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act after due inquiry and application of mind / and is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. (3) That on fact, and in law, the learned CIT has grievously erred in holding that the deduction of Rs. 16,15,315/- u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act is required to be disallowed." 3. The facts of the case which can be stated quite shortly are as follows: The assessee befo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and it was required to be disallowed which was not done in the assessment proceedings. Thus there was an underassessment of income of the assessee by Rs. 16,15,315/-, therefore assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 29.11.2016 in assessee`s case is considered erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Therefore, ld PCIT directed the assessing officer to recompute and determine the correct total income of the assessee after making disallowance of such wrong claim. 7. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. PCIT, the assessee is in appeal before us. 8. Before us Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) for the assessee submitted that first of all, the assessee did not claim deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of dispu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e, based on this factual position, we are of the view that order passed by the assessing officer should not be erroneous. 11. Apart from this, assuming assessee has claimed deduction in respect of interest received from co-operative bank, in that situation, we are of the view that u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act interest received from co-operative bank are allowable deduction, that is, the deduction is available in respect of interest received from co-operative bank for that reliance can be placed on the order of this co-ordinate Bench, in the case of Bardoli Vibhag GramVikas Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of income Tax-2,Surat in ITA No. 283/SRT/2019 dated 12.05.2021, wherein the co-ordinate bench held as follows: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....up Gramagala Seva Sahakari Sangh Niyamitha Venalli Vs CIT (ITA No. 609 & 610/ BNG/2014 dated 06/02/2015, • Solitaire CGHS Vs PCIT (ITA No. 3155/Mum/2019), • Sasme Co-op Society Vs PCIT (ITA No. 185/SRT/2020 dated 03.03.2021). 10. On the other hand the learned CIT-DR for the revenue supported the order of learned PCIT. The learned DR further submits that the order passed by assessing officer is not only erroneous but it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue as well. The assessing officer simply allowed the deduction under section 80P(2)(d) without discussing the issue in details and the nature of interest earned by assessee on deposit with cooperative banks. The order is not in accordance with the decis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ply dated 7.03.2019 clearly explained that the issue was examined by Assessing Officer and that the assessment order is not erroneous. The assessee also explained that similar disallowances /issues was subject matter in the appeal filed by the revenue before Tribunal in A.Y. 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2012-13 and the assessee was allowed similar deductions. 13.The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Aryan Arcade Ltd., vs PCIT (2019) 412 ITR 277 (Gujarat) held that merely because Commissioner held a different belief that would not permit him to take the order in revision, it if further held that when Assessing Officer made full enquiry, he made up his mind, the notice of revision is not valid. (emphasis added by us). Further, Hon'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee co-operative society could not claim benefit under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest earned by it from deposits made with nationalized/private banks, however, the said benefit was available in respect of interest earned and on deposits made with co-operative bank. Thus, in view of the aforesaid legal discussion we are of the considered view that order passed by Assessing Officer is not erroneous, though it may be prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Therefore, the twin conditions that orders is erroneous and so far as prejudicial to the interest of revenue, as prescribed under section 263 is not fulfilled in the present case. 17.Moreover, we have seen that in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2009-10, 2010-11 ....