2022 (11) TMI 1135

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ate to same assessee, therefore all the appeals were clubbed, heard together and are being decided by this consolidated order to avoid the conflicting decision. 2. In ITA No. 550/Srt/2019,for AY 2008-09 the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: "1.That on facts, and in law, the learned CIT(A) has grievously erred in confirming the levy of penalty of Rs. 1,62,407/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. That on facts, in law and on evidence on record, it ought to have been held that there is no neither concealment of income nor furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income within the meaning of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. The appellant craved liberty to add, alter, amend any ground of appeal." 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a cooperative society carrying banking business activities. The assessee filed its return of income declaring NIL income after claiming certain deductions under section 80P(2). The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) on 25/02/2016 by making total addition of Rs. 7,44,375/-. The Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order, made addition of Rs. 16,972 and Rs. 50,000/- on account of inte....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....le opportunity to explain the facts by issuing show cause notice. The assessee failed to explain or prove the fact that the interest income earned from nationalised bank was disclosed by assessee in computation of income. Further the Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction of Rs. 16,972/- and Rs. 50,000/- under Section 80P(2) and also added interest income earned from Nationalised bank of Rs. 5,24,223/-. The interest income earned from Nationalised Bank was not offered by the assessee in its computation of income. The assessing officer detected such income and made addition thereof. It was clear case of concealed income by no furnishing correct particulars. The assessee still has not come forward to explain the facts. The ld. Sr. DR for revenue prayed for dismissal of appeal. 6. We have heard the submission of ld. Sr.DR for the revenue and perused the record carefully. We find that the Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order, made disallowance of deduction of Rs. 16,972/- and Rs.50,000/- under section 80P(2) and also added interest income of Rs. 5,24,223/- earned from nationalised banks. Interest income of Rs. 5,24,223/- earned from nationalised banks was not dis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nationalised bank is deleted. So far as penalty on the addition of interest income of Rs. 10,90,550/- is concerned, we find that such interest income was not offered by the assessee while filing return of income, and on similar addition, we have upheld the penalty for A.Y. 2008- 09, therefore, the penalty on such addition is upheld. 10. In the result, this appeal of assessee is also partly allowed. 11. In ITA No. 552/Srt/2019 for A.Y. 2014-15, (quantum assessment) the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: "1.That on facts, and in law, the learned CIT(A) has grievously erred in making addition of Rs. 1,46,133/- by disallowing the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 2. That on facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) has grievously erred in confirming the action of the AO in making addition of Rs. 5,76,613/- in respect of interest income. 3. The appellant craved liberty to add, alter, amend any ground of appeal." 12. Brief facts of the case are that during assessment, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee derived interest income of Rs. 3,292/- from nationalised bank i.e. State Bank of India, such interest was not eligible....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 1,46,133/- under the head income from other sources and addition of interest income of Rs. 5,76,613/- from State bank of India on deposit of S.S.Y. fund. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed their written submission. The written submission of assessee is recorded in para 5 of order of ld. CIT(A). In the submission, the assessee has submitted that the assessee has not claimed any wrong deduction in its computation of income and relied on certain case laws that such interest income was allowable for deduction. 16. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee held that similar interest income from S.S.Y. fund was added by Assessing Officer and the same was upheld by Tribunal in A.Y. 2003-04 in order dated 09/5/2006. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) by following the order of Tribunal, upheld the said addition. So far as other additions of Rs. 1,46,133/- is concerned, the ld. CIT(A) held that such income was not derived from banking business activities and not allowable for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before this Tribunal. 17. We have heard the submission of ld. Sr. D....