2025 (1) TMI 1660

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ax (Appeals), hereinafter referred to as the "CIT(A)" is erroneous on the facts and in the law. On the facts and in the circumstances in the present case he ought to allow the appeal on the merits of the case. 2. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law and on the merits of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest income received from Co-operative Bank to the tune of Rs. 61,53,757/ -. 3. CIT(A) erred in denying the deduction solely based on incorrect filing of the income tax return, despite the appellant being legally entitled to the deduction under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Your appellant further submits that the denial of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in the intimation order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act dated 03.11.2022, the claim of the assessee was rejected and adjustment of Rs. 61,53,751/- was made. 3. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the adjustment observing as under: "4.1.5 The above case laws have been gone through respectfully. On perusal of each order, it is noticed that all the case laws deal with the issue raised in the assessment proceedings undertaken u/s. 143(3) of the Act except one case viz. Amore Commercial Premises Co-Op Society Ltd. Vs. CPC, Bangalore mentioned at Sr. No. 2 of above case laws. Therefore, all the case laws except Amore Commercial Premises Co-Op Society Ltd. are considered as inapplicable to the instant case as the appellant has filed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... disallowed the deduction claimed under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act in its intimation order under Section 143(1)(a). The assessee contended that the disallowance arose due to an inadvertent mistake in presenting the interest and dividend income in its return of income. It was argued before us that the adjustment made by the CPC failed to consider the factual position and the intent of the assessee to claim a legitimate deduction. We have carefully examined the matter and are of the opinion that the claim of the assessee cannot be summarily rejected merely due to incorrect reporting of interest and dividend income in the return of income. The intent and substance of the claim, as well as the supporting evidence, need to be examined in detai....