AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 189
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly the case was taken has scrutiny and the order was passed u/s 143(3) date of order 19.03.2016. In the assessment order the Ld.AO added back transfer fee, collection from others car and scooter parking at garden plot, additional maintenance, executive pass, advertisement and interest on delayed payment. The total addition was made amount to Rs. 1,11,89,292/-. The aggrieved assessee filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition amounting to Rs. 66,12,901/- relied on the order of coordinate bench of ITAT, Mumbai by proposition taken relation to the doctrine of mutuality. Finally the ground was uphold by Ld. CIT(A) by the order dated 28.04.2023. 2.1 Subsequently the Ld.AO issue notice u/s 148 of the Act on dated 05.05.2021, APB page No. 44. The reasons recorded by Ld.AO related to notice u/s 148 which is reproduced as below. (APB page 48 and 49) "1. The assessee has filed the return of income for A.Y. 2013-14 on 29.09.2013 declaring total income at Rs. 61,97,289/-, The case was assessed u/s 143(3) of the I. T. Act, 1961 on 19.03.2016 determining total income at Rs. 1,15,50,620/-, 2. It was observed from the records that during the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erms of provisions of section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 4. In this case, return of income was filed for the year under consideration and assessment u/s 143(3) was completed on 20.12.2016. Accordingly, in this case, the only requirement to initiate proceedings u/s 147 is reason to believe which has been recorded as above. It is pertinent to mention here that in this case the assessee had filed return of income for the year under consideration but no assessment as stipulated u/s 2(40) of the Act was made. In view of the above, provisions of clause (c) of explanation 2 to section 147 are applicable to facts of this case and the assessment year under consideration is deemed to be a case where income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. 5. In this case more than four years have lapsed from the end of assessment year under consideration. Hence, necessary sanction from the Pr. CIT-19, Mumbai to issue notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 is hereby sought as per the provisions of section 151 of the Act." 3. The assessee complied the said notice by a letter dated 08.06.2022 the copy said latter is Annexed in APB page 51. The relevant paragraphs of alleged letter ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owed after due inquiry and consideration of material on record in the course of original assessment proceedings. We request that the same may be provided to us in the interest of natural justice to meet the case. before proceeding further in the matter. 03 In this context, we reproduce the provisions of s 148A of the Act below -" (Emphasis supplied) 4. The Ld.AO rebutted the said reply of the assessee in order u/s 148A(d) of the Act by letter dated 30.07.2022, APB Page-53 to 56. The relevant part of the rebuttal of the Ld.AO in paragraphs 5 and 6 are reproduces as below: "In response to the said notice, the assessee has submitted his reply on ITBA portal on 15.06.2022. The gist of the assessee's reply is as under: " .......... The assessee has stated that the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on March, 2016 assessing the income at Rs. 1,15,50,620/- after considering details and explanation. The assessee in its computation of total income claimed deduction of Rs. 58,35,966/- u/s 80P(2)(d) on account of investments and the same was allowed.". 6. The submission of the assessee is considered and after verifying materi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nterest of income from Cooperative Bank and other income. The other income was added back with the total income of the assessee and finally the Ld. CIT(A) considered the merit of the case and respectfully relied on the order of Hon'ble ITAT the addition was deleted. The relevant to interest earned from the investment in Cooperative Bank that is Bharat Co-Operative Bank and Bombay Mercantile Mumbai District Cooperative are all the legal issues are settled by the higher judicial wisdom. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in PCIT v. Ashwinkumar Urban Co-operative Society Ltd. [2024] 168 taxmann.com 314 (Guj.), after considering the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural & Rural Development Bank Ltd. [2023] 154 taxmann.com 305 (SC), held that interest earned from investments made with a co-operative bank is eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(d). Similar views have been expressed in PCIT v. Shree Madhi Vighag Khand Udyog Sahakari Mandli Ltd. [2025] 171 taxmann.com 22 (Guj.). The Hon'ble Supreme Court in PCIT v. Annasaheb Patil Mathadi Kamgar Sahakari Pathpedi Ltd., reported in (2023) 150 taxmann.com 173 (SC) further clarified that a co-opera....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ively taken by the Assessing Officer. It is also not permissible to reopen purely on change of opinion. A general statement that the escapement of income is by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment is not enough. The Assessing Officer should indicate what was the material fact that was not truly and fully disclosed to him." Further, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Golden Tobacco Ltd. v. ACIT [2022] 136 taxmann.com 185 (Bom.), wherein it was held as under: "10. Therefore, once a query is raised during the assessment proceedings and the assessee has replied to it, it follows that the query raised was a subject for consideration of the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment. It is not necessary that an assessment order should contain reference and/or discussion to disclose its satisfaction in respect of the query raised. There can be no doubt that in the present facts, the five points mentioned above were subject matter of consideration by the Assessing Officer during the original assessment proceedings leading to the order dated 17th March ....