M/S. Cane Development Union Ltd.,, ... vs Assessee

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal19 June 2015

CitationI.T.A. No.656/Lkw/2011

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

A co-operative society that is entitled to deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act, so that no tax is payable on the income in question, does not, by failing to furnish the relevant report or statement, intend to conceal income or deprive the Government of revenue; accordingly, a penalty under section 271B cannot be sustained against such an assessee, following the view that no such intention exists where no tax is payable under section 80P.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

1IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNALLUCKNOW BENCH "A", LUCKNOWBEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBERAND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERITA Nos.459 & 460/LKW/2012Assessment years:2006-07 & 2007-08M/s Cane Development Union Ltd Vs D.C.I.T.,Masodha, Moti Nagar, Circle-Faizabad.District -Faizabad.PAN:AAAAC3037C(Appellant) (Respondent)I.T.A. No.656/Lkw/2011Assessment year:2006-07M/s Cane Development Union Ltd Vs D.C.I.T.Nawabganj, Gonda.District-Gonda.PAN:AACCC4157D(Appellant) (Respondent)Appellant by Shri J. N. Shukla, AdvocateRevenue by Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R.Date of hearing 22/04/2015Date of pronouncement 19/06/2015ORDERPER A. K. GARODIA, A.M.

It was submitted by Learned A.R. of the assessee that the only issue in these appeals is regarding penalty u/s 271B of the Act and this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal decision in the case of UP Co-operative Cane Development Union Ltd. in I.T.A. No.166/Lkw/2011 dated 07/07/2011. He submitted copy of the Tribunal decision.

2. Learned D. R. of the Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below.

2 3. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that in the case of UP Co-operative Cane Development Union Ltd., on which reliance has been placed by the assessee, the Tribunal has considered a judgment of Hon'ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of CIT and Another vs. Iqbalpur Co- operative Cane Development Union Ltd. [2009] 179 Taxman 27 wherein it was held by Hon'ble Uttarakhand High Court that there appears no intention on the part of the assessee to conceal the income or to deprive the Government of its revenue as no tax was payable on the income of the assessees in view of the provisions of section 80P of the Act. In the present case also, it is not in dispute that the assessee was eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act and therefore, this judgment of Hon'ble Uttarakhand High Court is squarely applicable in the present case. Respectfully following this judgment of Hon'ble Uttarakhand High Court which was followed by the Tribunal in the case of UP Co-operative Cane Development Union Ltd. (supra), we hold that in the present case also, penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271B of the Act is not justified and therefore, the same is deleted.

4. In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed.

(Order was pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page)

Sd/. Sd/.

(SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) Judicial Member Accountant Member

Dated:19/06/2015 *C.L.Singh

Copy of the order forwarded to : 1.The Appellant 2.The Respondent. 3.Concerned CIT 4.The CIT(A) 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow Asstt. Registrar

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free