Income Tax Case

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.306 of 2019 The Government Telecommunication Employees Co-operative Society Ltd.,New No.112, Old No.37 A,Sembudoss Street, Chennai-600 001. PAN : AABAT 3072B .. Appellant/Appellant -vs- The Income Tax Officer,Non Corporate Ward – 12(3),Chennai... Respondent/Respondent Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income-taxAct, 1961 against the order dated 19.09.2018 made inI.T.A.No.2478/Chny/2017 on the file of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, “B” Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2014-15against the Order of The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals-13), Chennai dated 13.07.2017 and made in ITA No.178/CIT(A)-13/2014-15 for the Assessment Year 2014-15 against the Order ofthe Income Tax Office, Non -Corporate Ward 12 (3), Chennai -6,dated 29.12.16 and made in AABAT 3072B for Assessment Year 2014-15. For Appellant:Mr.A.S.SriramanFor Respondent :Mr.M.Swaminathan,Senior Standing Counsel,and Mrs.V.Pushpa,Junior Standing CounselJUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) This appeal, by the assessee filed under Section 260A ofthe Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”),is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Tribunal “B” Bench, Chennai in I.T.A.No.2478/Chny/2017, dated19.09.2018 for the assessment year 2014-15. 2.The assessee has raised the following substantialquestions of law for consideration:-“(i) Whether the Appellate Tribunal iscorrect in denying the claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act by following their non-existent order dated 08.06.2018? (ii) Whether the provisions of Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act permit the claim for deductionrelatable to the interest income earned from theadvances to the staff/employees as well as fromthe interest earned from savings bank account?(iii) Whether the reading of the bye-laws ofthe Appellant society as well as the provisions inMSCS Act, 2002 for interpreting section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act while considering the correctnessof claim of deduction in the computation oftaxable total income was in accordance with thewell settled principles of purposive theory andharmonious interpretation in the orders underchallenge?” 3.We have heard Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel appearingfor the appellant/assessee; and Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned SeniorStanding Counsel and Mrs.V.Pushpa, learned Junior StandingCounsel for the respondent/Revenue. 4.We need not labour much to decide the substantialquestions of law, as a serious error has crept in in theimpugned order presumably due to oversight. The Tribunal reliedupon an order in I.T.A.No.2478/Mds/2017 for the assessment year2014-15 and held that the appeal does not merit consideration.Unfortunately, it is the very same appeal which was to bedecided by the Tribunal because, the said appeal was disposed ofearlier by a single member bench vide order dated 11.01.2018.This order was set aside by the jurisdictional bench of theTribunal by order dated 08.06.2018 by recalling the earlierorder dated 11.01.2018 and accordingly, the appeal stood fixedfor hearing. Unfortunately, neither the assessee’s authorisedrepresentative, nor the Department's representative brought tothe notice of the Tribunal that it is the very same appeal whichhas to be heard on merits. On the contrary, it appears thatboth of them had referred to the earlier order dated 11.01.2018in the same appeal which stood recalled by order dated08.06.2018. 5.In the light of the above, the impugned order passed bythe Tribunal has to be necessarily set aside and the appeal https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ should be remanded to the file of the Tribunal to be heard anddecided afresh. 5.In the light of the above, the impugned order passed bythe Tribunal has to be necessarily set aside and the appeal https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ should be remanded to the file of the Tribunal to be heard anddecided afresh. 6.In the light of the above, the substantial questions oflaw are not required to be decided and they are left open. 7.In the result, the appeal is allowed, the impugned orderpassed by the Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remandedto the Tribunal to be heard and decided afresh. It is madeclear that all issues are left open. No costs. abr Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarTo1.The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward – 12(3), Chennai.2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Chennai.3.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai-600 034. +1cc to Mr.M.Swaminathan, Advocate, SR.No.45254 +1cc to Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate, SR.No.45168 Kak(23/07/2019) T.C.A.No.306 of 2019 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/