TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 2030
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lowing the interest income received from co-operative banks under section 80P(2)(d) of Rs. 85,74,976/- instead of Rs. 1,19,74,102 due to mere typographical mistake in ground No. 4 submitted with CIT(A). The actual interest income from Co-Operative Banks was Rs. 1,74,31,818, but the claim under section 80P(2)(d) was restricted to the gross total income of Rs. 1,19,74,102 while filing the return of income. 2) Without prejudice to Ground No. 1, on facts and circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in disallowing the interest income received from ICICI Bank and Axis Bank amounting to Rs. 2,79,834 where the fixed deposits are kept on account of business necessity since the assessee society is availing the NEFT, RTGS and Mo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....01.2021 declaring total income at Rs. Nil after claiming deduction u/s 80P of the Act at Rs. 1,19,74,102/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) respectively were issued to the assessee. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) by determining total income of Rs. 1,19,74,102/- as against the income returned by the assessee at Rs. Nil. The above assessed income includes addition on account of disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P of Rs. 1,19,74,102/-. 4. After considering the reply of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC partly allowed the appeal by observing as under :- "5.8 In the instant case, as per the assessment order page no. 4, the appellant has earned interest income of Rs. 6,80....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this Tribunal. 6. Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is unjustified. Ld. AR further submitted that although Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC was justified in principally allowing the interest income received from cooperative banks u/s 80P(2)(d) of Rs. 85,74,976/-. However, due to an inadvertent typographical error in grounds of appeal, the interest amount received from cooperative bank was mentioned as Rs. 85,74,976/- instead of Rs. 1,19,74,102/-. It was further submitted by Ld. AR that the interest income received from cooperative banks was in-fact Rs. 1,74,31,118/- but the claim u/s 80P(2)(d) was restricted to the gross total income of Rs. 1,19,74,102/-. Apart from above without p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Act and disclosed Nil income in its return of income after claiming deduction of Rs. 1,19,74,102/-. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee cooperative society can only give and take advances/loans facilities to its members only & not to other banks. Accordingly, he disallowed the interest derived on its investments with other banks and disallowed the deduction claimed u/s 80P of Rs. 1,19,74,102/-. In this regard, we find that the assessee has relied on the decision passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Chandraprabhu Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Pat Sanstha (supra) wherein under identical facts and similar circumstances, the Tribunal was pleased to allow the appeal of the assessee by observing a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alifies for sec.80P deduction and thereby declined it's very stand. Faced with this situation, I adopt the foregoing detailed discussion mutatis mutandis to accept the assessee's sec.80P(2)(a)(i)/80P(2)(d) deduction claim(s) in very terms. Ordered accordingly." 10. Identical issue was considered and decided in favour of the assessee by the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Yogiraj Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit Vs. ITO in ITA No. 1152/PUN/2023, dated 06.06.2024 wherein the Tribunal in turn relying on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of The Ugar Sugar Works Kamgar & Dr. Shirgaokar Shaikshanik Trust Nokar Co-op Credit Society vs. ITO in ITA No.84/PAN/2018, dated 27.05.2022 held as under : "9. Fo....