TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (7) TMI 369
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....einafter referred to as 'the Act') dated 22.12.2017 by the ld. Assessing Officer, Circle-3(1), Bulandshahr (hereinafter referred to as 'ld. AO'). 2. At the outset, we find that there is a delay in filing the appeal by the assessee by 639 days. An affidavit was filed from the present Secretary of the assessee stating that the previous Secretary, who was looking after income-tax matters had been transferred to another branch, and due to that, there was a delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The Bench on earlier occasion had directed the assessee to file an affidavit from the concerned Secretary, who was taking care of the income-tax matters at the relevant point in time. This affidavit was filed by the concerned Secretary Mr. Sag....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ferred to supra, is reproduced hereunder:- "3. The assessee is a cooperative society derives income from banking activity and house property. Return declaring income of Rs. 3,50,53,910/- was E-filed on 27.09.2012. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was observed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee had credited the amount of Rs. 1,82,02,860/- on account of dividend under the head gross receipts which had been claimed exempt in the computation of income. It was also observed by the Assessing Officer that the IFFCO from whom dividend was received was not a company but was a cooperative society and dividend distribution tax had not been deducted by IFFCO. It was held by the Assessing Officer that the dividend income was not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng interrelated are against the addition of Rs. 1,82,02,860/- being disallowance of dividend income received form IFFCO and U.P. Cooperative Bank Ltd. During appeal proceedings the appellant has made written submission, the relevant para is reproduced as under:- ".................... Unfortunately the claim of exemption in respect of dividend income of the appellant considered with reference to the provisions of section 1150 and section 10(34) was not correct as the claim is admissible u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act. It may be submitted that the appellant is a cooperative society and the dividend paying concern i.e. Indian Farmer Fertilizer cooperative Ltd. is also a society. Since the dividend income derived by the appellant is fro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... respectively. To decide the impugned issue let us go through the relevant provisions of the Act. Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act says- "in respect of any income by way of interest or dividends derived by the co-operative investment with any other co-operative society, the whole of such income." The appellant has received dividend from IFFCO and U.P. Cooperative Bank Ltd, which are cooperative society. As far as IFFCO is concerned, the fact that it is a cooperative society is an established fact in earlier years and this year also the A.O. has mentioned that it is a cooperative society. As far as the U.P. Cooperative Bank Ltd. is concerned, the A.O. has not mentioned anything about it. I have verified that it is cooperative society as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is not in dispute that the assessee had maintained regular books of account which are duly audited by a firm of Chartered Accountants and presented before the Registrar of Cooperative Societies. The accounts of the assessee are also subjected to audit by NABARD on behalf of the Reserve Bank of India. The only reason adduced by the lower authorities for not allowing the depreciation was that the assessee has not filled the depreciation figure in the relevant column of ITR, i.e., in column No. 45 of the return in Part-A - P&L Account in the ITR form. We find that the assessee had mentioned the depreciation figure of Rs. 1,00,46,380/- under column No. 39 in sub-item No. 14 under....