TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 79
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Act") relevant to the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax - 1, Rajkot erred in assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act, particularly in the light of reasons stated by him in the show cause notice and in the order passed u/s 263 of the Act and hence the impugned order is bad in law. 2. The learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax - 1, Rajkot erred in setting aide the assessment order framed u/s.143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act by holding that the AO dis not conduct any inquiries or verification in respect of eligibility of deduction claimed by the Appellant of interest income u/s.80P(2)(a)(i)/80P(2)(d) of the Act. 3. The learned Pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....earing on behalf of the revenue. There was no objection raised by the learned DR, if the matter is taken up for hearing today only. Upon receiving the concession of the learned DR, we decided to take up the main appeal of the assessee. 5. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the learned PCIT erred in holding the assessment framed by the AO under section 143(3) of the Act as erroneous insofar prejudicial to the interest of Revenue under the provisions of section 263 of the Act. 6. The facts in brief are that the assessee in the present case is a co-operative society and engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to its members. The assessee in the year under consideration declared interest income of Rs. 35,08,387/- fro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efit of provision of section 80P(2)(d) cannot be extended to the interest earned from co-operative bank as the same has been excluded from the co-operative society by insertion of section 80P(4) of the Act by the Finance Act 2006. Accordingly, the Learned Pr. CIT was of the view the AO, without proper application of law and due verification of the fact, allowed the deduction claimed by the assessee which amounts to an error committed by the AO, causing prejudice to the Revenue. Accordingly, the ld. PCIT set aside the assessment order as erroneous insofar prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 8. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned PCIT, the assessee is in appeal before us. 9. The learned AR before us inter-alia contended that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elevant extract of the judgement of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of in case of CIT vs. Sabarkantha District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd. in Tax Appeal No. 473 of 2014 reads as under: "Considering Section 80(P)(2)(d) of the Act when the only requirement was that the income should be received from investment in Cooperative Societies and the Cooperative Bank which in the present case has been fulfilled, it cannot be said that the learned Tribunal has committed an error in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 1,42,19,515/- under section 80(P)(2)(d) of the Act." 11.1 Based on the above, it is transpired that the AO has taken one of the possible view for allowing the deduction to the assessee under the provisions of section 80P(2)(d....