Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr.

156 ITR 11High Court1985#117 most cited

What is Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr. authority for?

When there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Courts, the view that favors the assessee should be preferred.

541

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,164 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Subramanian v. Siemens India Ltd. · 156 ITR 11 · conflict of High Court decisions · non-jurisdictional High Courts · assessee-favorable interpretation · tax law principle · Section 80P(2)(d) · co-operative society · judicial precedent application

Also reported as

36 CTR 197

Sections most often in play

Section 80P(2)(d)Section 143(3)Section 80P(4)Section 80P(2)(a)(i)Section 263Section 143(1)Section 250Section 2(19)

Issues it is cited on

section 80(2)(d)section 57(i)section 80(p)(2)(a)section 2(19)tax collected at sourcesection 286section 200a(1)(c)section 80p(4)section 161section 80p(2)(c)section 80(p)(2)(d)section 200a(1)

Judgments citing Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr.

Ethiraj Hotel Mart, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3 (40, Chennai

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

ITA 1086/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.Gआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 1086/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ethiraj Hotel Mart, The Dcit, 25/22, Evening Bazaar, Vs. Central Circle 3(4), Park Town, Chennai. Chennai – 600 003. Pan: Aaefe 3406A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Hema Murali Krishnan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.12.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.12.2023

For Appellant: Shri Hema Murali Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 69B

…is conflicting views rendered by different High Courts, the view taken by the jurisdictional High Court is binding in the jurisdictional area of the respective High Court. The Honble Bombay High Court in the case of Subramaniam -vs.- Siemens India Ltd. (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom.) held that so far as the legal position is concerned, the ITO would be bound by a decision of the Supreme Court as also by a decision of the High Court of the State within whose jurisdiction he is functioning, irrespective of the pendency of any appeal or special leave application against the judgment, he would equally be bound by a decision…

Ahmednagar Zilha Parishad Servant'S Co-Op Credit Society Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ahmednagar

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1101/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Gd Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GD PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.1101/PUN./2023 Assessment Year 2018-2019 Ahmednagar Zilha Parishad Servant’s Co-op Credit The Income Tax Officer, Society Ltd., Tilak Road, Ward – 1, Income Tax vs. Opp. Wadia Park, Department, Ahmednagar – 414 001 Behind Natraj Hotel, Maharashtra. Ahmednagar – 414 001. PAN AAAJA0362K (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Kishor Phadke For Revenue : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of Hearing : 20.12.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 27.12.2023 ORDER PER SA…

Mahapalika Kshetra Madhyamik Shikshak Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 22(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3072/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blemahapalika Kshetra Madhyamik V. Ito – Ward – 22(2)(1) Shikshk Sahakari Pat Sanstha Piramal Chambers Maryadit (Cooperative Credit Society) Mumbai - 400012 201/202 Anish Tower Senapati Bapat Marg Matunga (W), Mumbai Pan: Aaaam1865G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Smit Sheth Shri Satya Prakash Singh Department Represented By :

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…igh Court had concluded that a co-operative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). We however find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court’s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Thus, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon’ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon'bl…

Mahesh Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Limited, Ahmednagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Ahmednagar

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1140/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(i)

…laim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. Backed by the aforesaid conflicting judicial pronouncements, we may herein observe, that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non- jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in 12 ITA.No.1140/PUN./2023 favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully fo…

Subhash Chowk Urban Co- Operative Credit Society Limited, Jalgaon vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-1(4), Jalgaon

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1042/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Nov 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Vinay V KawdiaFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…laim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. Backed by the aforesaid conflicting judicial pronouncements, we may herein observe, that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non- jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by th…

Hillway Sadhna Co Op Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

ITA 2675/MUM/2023[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2023AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri K Shivram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Joginder Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80P(2)(d)

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Chetak Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai Suburban vs. The Income Tax Officer, 23(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the appeal is allowed

ITA 2934/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 2934 & 2935/Mum/2023 (A.Y: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Chetak Co-Operative Vs. Ito – 23(1)(3) Housing Society Ltd,35 Mumbai-400020. Maju Mahal, Pali Hill, Bandra (West), Mumbai-400050. Pan/Gir No. : Aaaac0996J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Anuj Kisnadwala & Shri Vinay Sinha.Ar Respondent By : Shri G.J. Ninawe. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 03.11.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac)/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri. Anuj Kisnadwala, &For Respondent: Shri G.J. Ninawe. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 80Section 80P(2)(d)

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which ITA No. 2934 & 2935/Mum/2023 Chetak Co-Op Housing Society Ltd., Mumbai. is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble H…

Kinjal Heaven Co Operative Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-19(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the appeal is allowed

ITA 2955/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 2955, 2956, 2957 & 2958/Mum/2023 (A.Y: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Kinjal Heaven Vs. Ito,Ward19(2)(2), Cooperative Society Ltd, Piramal Chambers, 1St Wadia Street, 5Th Floor, Near Mumbai-400034. Bharatmata Theatre, Parel (East), Mumbai-400012. Pan/Gir No. : Aacak6843Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Rajesh Shah.Ar Respondent By : Shri.G.J.Ninawe. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 06.11.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Four Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec250 Of The Act For The A.Y 2017-18 & For The A.Y 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Passed U/S 143(1) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri.Rajesh Shah.ARFor Respondent: Shri.G.J.Ninawe. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Kona Seema Co Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. CPC, Bangalore, Mumbai

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

ITA 2025/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalekona Seemaco-Operative Vs. Cpc Housing Society Ltd. Bangalore. Plot No. 8, V.N Purav Marg, Near Diamond Garden, Chembur. Mumbai-400071. Pan/Gir No. : Aadak0665K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ashish A.Thakurdesai.ARFor Respondent: Shri G.J. Ninawe. Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234ASection 80Section 80P(2)(d)

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of Kona Seema Co-op Housing Society, Mumbai. jurisdiction, we…

Alsid Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT/ACIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1204/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Ms Indira Adakil
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM ITA Nos. 1204 & 1205/Mum/2023 (Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22) Alsid Co-operative Housing Society Ltd DCIT/ACIT-CPC ST Andrews Road Bandra Bangalore Vs. Mumbai-400 050 PAN/GIR No. AAGAA 6813 J (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Bhupendra Shah Revenue by : Ms Indira Adakil Date of Hearing : 04.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 27.09.2023 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: These two appeals have been filed by the assessee, challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of…

The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Ahmednagar vs. Krushi Vidnyan Pradhyapak Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Ahmednagar

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 701/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Sept 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: CA Devendra A. PatilFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A” : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.701/PUN./2023 Assessment Year 2020-21 The Income Tax Officer, Krushi Vidnyan Ward-2, Aayakar Bhavan, Pradhyapak Sahakari Pat Behind Natraj Hotel, Sanstha Maryadit, Aurangabad Road, vs. Mahatma Phule Krushi – Ahmednagar – 414 001. Vidyapith, Nagar Manmad Maharashtra Road, Rahuri, PAN AAAAK4147K Ahmednagar – 413 705. Maharashtra. Appellant Respondent For Assessee : CA Devendra A. Patil For Revenue : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of Hearing : 29.08.2023 D…

Om Shri Yashodhan Co-Op Hsg., Soc., Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 41(4)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1236/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Om Shri Yashodhan Co-Op Hsg Soc Ito-Ward-41(4)(3) Road No 5 Ay Prakash Nagar Mumbai Vs. Goregaon (E) Mumbai-400 063

For Appellant: Shri Viay JoshiFor Respondent: Ms. Indira Adakil
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…iety on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court’s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking 8 Om Shri Yashodhan Co-op Hsg Soc vs. ITO support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, w…

Silver Sand Coop Housing Soc Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1425/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blebuilding No. 12, Silver Sands Chs Ltd., Bangalore Post Bag No. 2 S.V. Road, Piramal Nagar Electronic City, Post Office Goregaon (W), Mumbai - 400062 Bangalore - 560100 Pan: Aadas5600G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 245Section 80P

…igh Court had concluded that a co-operative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). We however find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court’s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Thus, taking support from the aforesaid judicial Page No. 14 ITA NO. 1425/MUM/2023 (A.Y: 2011-12 Silver Sand Coop Housing Society Ltd., pronouncement of th…

Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Karamchari Sakh Sahkari Samiti, Satna vs. Assistant Commissioner of Incometax, Katni

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

ITA 102/JAB/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadalejila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Vs National E Karamchari Sakh Sahkari Assessment Samiti Maryadit Satna, Center, Income Tax Sahkar Bhawan, Behind Department, New Green Talkies, Pushpraj Delhi Colony, Satna (M.P)-485001. Acit, Katni (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabaj4497Q Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Shiv Kumar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2023

Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80p

…ty on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non jurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

The Marol Co-Operative Industrial Estate Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-25(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2027/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry: A.Y : 2017-18 The Marol Co-Operative Industrial Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Estate Limited Tax, Circle 25(1), Mumbai. Marol Bhavan, Mathurdas (Respondent) Vasanji Road, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 059. Pan : Aaaat0060A (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Kartik NatrajanFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…igh Court had concluded that a co-operative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). We however find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Thus, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon'bl…

Gramin Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Lawan, Baloda Bazar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Bhatapara, Baloda Bazar

ITA 208/RPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: None (Written Submissions)For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ety on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Gramin Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Lawan, Baloda Bazar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Bhatapara, Baloda Bazar

ITA 207/RPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: None (Written Submissions)For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ety on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Gramin Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Lawan, Baloda Bazar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Bhatapara, Baloda Bazar

ITA 206/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: None (Written Submissions)For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ety on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Gramin Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Lawan, Baloda Bazar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Bhatapara, Baloda Bazar

ITA 205/RPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: None (Written Submissions)For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ety on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Gramin Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Khauna, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-1(2), Raipur

ITA 204/RPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: None (Written Submissions)For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ety on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…