CIT v. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd.

389 ITR 68High Court2016#489 most cited

What is CIT v. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd. authority for?

Income earned by a cooperative society from investing its surplus funds in short-term deposits and securities is not attributable to its core activities and therefore not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

192

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd. · Section 80P · Section 80P(2)(a)(i) · cooperative society deduction · income from surplus funds · short term deposits interest · securities income · not eligible for exemption · attributable to business · banking activities

Also reported as

77 Taxmann.com 308245 Taxmann 125

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd.

Narendra Shantikumar Firodia, Ahmednagar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmednagar

ITA 494/PUN/2020[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 494/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Narendra Shantikumar Firodia, 5 Shobha Sadan, Aurangabad Road, Dsp Chowk, Ahmednagar – 414 002 Pan :Aabpf6158K . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ahmednagar. . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri C. H. Naniwadekar Revenue By : Shri Ramnath Murkunde सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 13/10/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/12/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Is Assailed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 20/03/2020 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”] Upholding The Order Of Assessment Dt. 28/12/2016 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ahmednagar Circle, Ahmednagar [For Short “Ao”] For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2014-15. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 8

For Appellant: Shri C. H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 50C

…in our considered opinion, the point sought to be raised by the Ld. AR deserves to be upheld. Such a distinction also has found approval of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of “CIT Vs Greenfield Hotels & Estates Pvt. Ltd.” Reported in 389 ITR 68. 10. In view of the aforesaid factual position and in law, we find that the present transaction of transfer of leasehold right in question does not warrant invoking of section 50C(1) of the Act, as the property in question is not of the explicitly covered by section 50C(1) of the Act, for the reason, we set aside the order of the Ld. FAA and direc…

Lokmangal Nagri Sahakari Path Sanstha Mydt, Solapur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax -4, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 231/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.231/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Lokmangal Nagri Sahakari Vs. Pcit-4, Pune. Path Sanstha Maryadit, 94/29, Mangal Plaza, Opposite Padma Talkies, Jodbhavi Peth, Solapur- 413002. Pan : Aaaal1241M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Girish Ladda Revenue By : Shri Ganesh Bare Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29.11.2022 : आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-4, Pune (‘The Pcit’) Dated 19.03.2022 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Ld. Pr. Cit Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Assuming The Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The It Act, More So When The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Is Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Girish LaddaFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…R 578 (Guj.), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mantola Co- operative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd. Vs. CIT 50 taxmann.com 278, the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd. 389 ITR 68 and the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Southern Eastern Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. 390 ITR 524 took a view that the income arising on the surplus invested in short term deposits and securities cannot be attributed to the activities of the society and, therefore, not eligible for exemption u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the A…

Shr Arunoday Multi State Co-Op Cr Soc Ltd, Solapur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax - 4, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 229/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.229/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Arunoday Multi State Co- Vs. Pcit-4, Pune. Operative Credit Society Ltd., Arunoday 22 Veershaiv Nagar, Vij Apur Road, Jule Solapur, Solapur- 413001. Pan : Aakas8478H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Girish Ladda Revenue By : Shri Ganesh Bare Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29.11.2022 : आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-4, Pune (‘The Pcit’) Dated 28.03.2022 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Ld. Pr. Cit Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Assuming The Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The It Act, More So When The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Is Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Girish LaddaFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…R 578 (Guj.), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mantola Co- operative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd. Vs. CIT 50 taxmann.com 278, the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd. 389 ITR 68 and the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Southern Eastern Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. 390 ITR 524 took a view that the income arising on the surplus invested in short term deposits and securities cannot be attributed to the activities of the society and, therefore, not eligible for exemption u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the A…