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 367,181 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.

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

ITA 203/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 Sahakri Samiti Maryadit, Dharsiwa, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer 1(2), Raipur

ITA 202/RPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

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…

Shanthilal Jain Vijay Kumar, Thiruvannamalai vs. ADIT, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1103/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Mr.D. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)

…s 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 Hon’ble 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…

The Tata Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT)-17, Mumbai

ITA 1864/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Ridhima Ramnani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri. Biswanath Das- CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263Section 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 support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Thane Postal Employees Co- Operative Credit Society Limited, Mumbai vs. PCIT-Thane-1, Thane

ITA 1871/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev V. Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P(2)Section 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 support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Mumbai Postal Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 17(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1051/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Aug 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.1050 & 1051/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2015-16 & 2016-17) Mumbai Postal Employees Vs. Income Tax Officer, Co-Operative Credit Ward 17(2)(1) Society Limited, Gpo Room No. 115, 1 St Floor, Building, Fort, Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To Mumbai – 400001 C-43, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaajm0032G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Neena Jeph
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…on of Karnataka High Court in Pr. CIT vs Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd (2017) 395 ITR 611. have decided the issue in favour of the assessee after relying on decision of Jurisdictional High Court in K. Subramanian ITO vs Siemens India Ltd & Anr. (1985) 156 ITR 11 where it was held that 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. P a g e | 14 ITA Nos. 1050 & 1051/Mum/2023 Mumbai Postal Employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward 17(2)(1) Thus, The Bombay…

Mumbai Postal Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 17(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1050/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.1050 & 1051/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2015-16 & 2016-17) Mumbai Postal Employees Vs. Income Tax Officer, Co-Operative Credit Ward 17(2)(1) Society Limited, Gpo Room No. 115, 1 St Floor, Building, Fort, Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To Mumbai – 400001 C-43, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaajm0032G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Neena Jeph
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…on of Karnataka High Court in Pr. CIT vs Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd (2017) 395 ITR 611. have decided the issue in favour of the assessee after relying on decision of Jurisdictional High Court in K. Subramanian ITO vs Siemens India Ltd & Anr. (1985) 156 ITR 11 where it was held that 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. P a g e | 14 ITA Nos. 1050 & 1051/Mum/2023 Mumbai Postal Employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward 17(2)(1) Thus, The Bombay…

Vasant Nagari Sector V Chs Ltd (AOP), Thane vs. ITO Ward-4(4), Thane

ITA 1475/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2023AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Darpan Jawale, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…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 support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Navrang Basant Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward-17(2)(4), Mumbai

ITA 1354/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2023AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Ms. Krupa Toprani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri. B. Laxmi Kanth, D.R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 234BSection 80ASection 80PSection 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 support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Raheja Eternity Chs Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 32(2)(4), Mumbai

ITA 1013/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: The Due 2 M/S. Raheja Eternity Chs Ltd.

For Appellant: Ms. Kiran Vadher, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80P

…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 support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

The ITO-22(1)(6), Mumbai vs. Casa Grande Co-Op Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1519/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. H.M. Bhatt, Sr. A.R
Section 143(3)Section 70Section 80PSection 80P(2)

…'ble Jurisdictional High court on the issue of eligibility of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act on interest income from cooperative bank has been brought our notice. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of K. Subramanian Vs. Siemens India Ltd. 156 ITR 11 has held that when two conflicting decisions on non-jurisdictional High courts are available, the view which is in favour of the assessee, is to be preferred. In the light of decisions discussed above and the facts of the case, we find no infirmity In the order of CIT(A). Hence, the same is upheld and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed." 9.4.…

Punjab National Bank Employees Co-Op Credit Soc. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre, Mumbai

ITA 1384/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kasat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 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 support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

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

ITA 1424/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Silver Sand Co-Op. Acit (Cpc), Bangalore, Housing Society Ltd., Post Bag No.2, Building No.12, Electronic City, Silver Sands Chs Ltd., Post Office, Vs. S.V. Road, Bangalore-560100 Piramal Nagar, Goregaon (West), Mumbai – 400 062 Pan: Aadas5600G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Ravindra Poojary, A.R. Revenue By : Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Ravindra Poojary, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 245Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 8O

…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 support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Sindhudurg Nagri Sahakari Pathpedhi Ltd, Mumbai vs. PCIT, Thane 1, Thane

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

ITA 1592/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 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 support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Sahyadri Nagari Sahakari Patpedhi Limited, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, Thane -1, Thane

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

ITA 1509/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80Section 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 support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the…

Rustomjee Aspiree Premises Co-Op Soc. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 26(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1195/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rustomjee Aspiree Premises Co- Ito Ward 26(2)(5), Op. Soc. Ltd., Room No. 319, 3Rd Floor, Kautilya Vs. Ground Floor, Rustomjee Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, ‘G’ Block Aspiree, Cts No. 628, Ai, Pt Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra Kurla, Eatern Express Highway, (East), Mumbai-400051. Sion, Mumbai-400022. Pan No. Aabar 4001 L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Ms. Indira Adakil, DR
Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)(d)

…he Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. 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 Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court’s, a conflict between the decisions of non jurisdictional High Court’s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be…

Gautam Dhan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 34(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 997/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalegautam Dhan Co-Op Ito, Ward 34(2)(1), Housing Society Ltd., 815, Kautilya Bhavan बनाम/ 368, Bajaj Road, Bkc,Bandra (E), Vs. Vile Parle (W), Mumbai- 400051. Mumbai- 400056. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaabg0540K (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Mr. Manan Mathuria.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita Kaushik.DR
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Gautam Dhan Co-op ITO, Ward 34(2)(1), Housing Society Ltd., 815, Kautilya Bhavan बनाम/ 368, Bajaj Road, BKC,Bandra (E), Vs. Vile Parle (W), Mumbai- 400051. Mumbai- 400056. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAABG0540K (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant by : Mr. Manan Mathuria.AR ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Kavita Kaushik.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing 13/06/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 13/06/2023 आदेश / ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE - JM: The ap…

Colaba Sangita Co. Op Hsg Soc. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 865/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blecolaba Sangita Coop Hsg Ltd V. Commissioner Of Income Tax 27/28 Colaba Sangita Co-Op Mumbai Housing Soc Ltd, Arthur Bunder Road, Colaba Mumbai- 400005 Pan: Aaaac1325P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Deepika Arora

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 274Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…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…

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 820/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleshiraz Co-Operative Housing V. Dcit/Acit, Cpc, Bangalore Society Ltd Kautilya Bhavan Plot No. 9/10, Shiraz Chs Mumbai- 400051 Telli Galli, Andheri (East) Mumbai- 400069 Pan: Aabas5242A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. Bhupendra Shah Department Represented By : Ms. Deepika Arora

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…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…

Bhoomi Classic Co-Op Hsg.Soc.Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO Ward-30(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 981/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalebhoomi Classic Co-Op Ito, Ward 30(1)(2) Hsg. Soc. Ltd., Room No. 436, 4Th बनाम/ Cts No. 1406, Link Floor, Kautilya Vs. Road, Opp Sabkuch Bhavan, C-41 To C- Market, Malad (West) 43, G Block, Bkc, Mumbai- 400064. Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaab4452G (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Ms. NeelamJadhav.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita Kaushik.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Bhoomi Classic Co-op ITO, Ward 30(1)(2) Hsg. Soc. Ltd., Room No. 436, 4th बनाम/ CTS No. 1406, Link Floor, Kautilya Vs. Road, Opp Sabkuch Bhavan, C-41 to C- Market, Malad (West) 43, G Block, BKC, Mumbai- 400064. Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAAAB4452G (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant by : Ms. NeelamJadhav.AR ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Kavita Kaushik.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing 13/06/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronounce…