VAINGANGA NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA LTD,BHANDARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BHANDARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 49/NAG/2020Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 June 2021AY 2016-176 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 'Nominal Member' is included within the definition of 'Member'. Therefore, loans advanced to nominal members are eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i).

What were the facts?

The assessee, a co-operative society, claimed deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) for profits from providing credit facilities. The AO disallowed the deduction, stating the society advanced loans to non-members (nominal members) in violation of the section.

What were the issues?

Whether interest income from loans advanced to 'Nominal Members' of a co-operative society is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) when the state act includes nominal members within the definition of 'member'.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P(2)(a)(i)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR – VIRTUAL COURT

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Soni
For Respondent: Smt. Agnes P Thomas

PER R.S.SYAL, VP :

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(Appeals)-2, Nagpur on 31-01-2020 in relation to the assessment year 2016-17. 2. The only issue raised in this appeal is against the denial of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

3.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a Co-operative society registered under the Maharashtra Co-

operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter called `the Maharashtra Act’). It is engaged in providing credit facilities to its Members. A return of income was filed claiming deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) amounting to Rs.33,41,435. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the assessee was carrying on its activities in violation of provisions of section 80P(2)(a)(i) inasmuch as it had advanced loans to persons who were not Members of the society. On being called upon to explain its stand, the assessee submitted that the loans were advanced only to the Members, be it Regular (ordinary) members or Nominal members. Relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. vs. ACIT (2017) 84 taxmann.com 114 (SC), the AO repelled the assessee’s claim and disallowed the deduction by holding that the assessee violated the provisions by accepting deposits from and making advances to such members, who though described as ‘Nominal Members’, were not entitled to dividend or shareholders’ rights. The ld. CIT(A) echoed the assessment order on this point, against which the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

We have heard the rival submissions through Virtual Court and scanned through the relevant material on record. The assessee Co-operative society is admittedly engaged in carrying on the business of banking and providing credit facilities. Section 80P(2)(a)(i) provides that in the case of co-operative society engaged in carrying on the business of banking or providing credit facilities to its members, the whole of the amount of profits and gains of business attributable to such activities shall be deductible in the computation of total income. The claim of assessee for deduction has been negated by the authorities below on the ground that it had admitted certain Members, described as ‘Nominal Members’, who were neither entitled to dividend nor voting rights. It is relevant to note that the term ‘Member’ has been defined u/s 2(19) in the Maharashtra Act to mean: “a person joining in an application for the registration of a Co-operative society which is subsequently registered, or a person duly admitted to membership of a society after registration and includes a nominal, associate or sympathizer member”. On going through the above definition of ‘Member’, it becomes overt that the term ‘Member’ also includes a Nominal Member. Once it is accepted that the assessee, governed

by the Maharashtra Act, made advances to certain Nominal Members from whom interest income was earned, there can be no doubt whatsoever that the deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) has to be allowed. The Department has heavily relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Citizen Co-operative Society Mutually Aided Co-operative Society Act, 1995 was under consideration, which did not admit `Nominal Member’ within the ambit of the term ‘Member’. Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. vs. CIT (2021) 123 taxmann.com 161 (SC) considered its earlier judgment in Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. vs. ACIT (supra) vide para 46 of its order. Taking note of the fact that the Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. vs. ACIT (supra) judgment dealt with the Andhra Act wherein the term ‘Member’ did not include Nominal Member, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service (supra) held that the interest on loans given to Nominal Members under the Kerala Act was eligible u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act as the term ‘Member’ under the Kerala Act included ‘Nominal Members’. In view of the foregoing discussion, it is evident that when the loans are given to Nominal

Members and the relevant State Act includes, ‘Nominal Member’ purview of ‘Member’, there can be no question of denial of benefit u/s 80P(2)(a)(i).

5.

Adverting to the facts of the instant case, we find that the provisions of the Kerala Act and the Maharashtra Act, in so far as the term `Member’ including `Nominal member’ is concerned, are similar. The Hon’ble juri ictional High Court in Jalgaon District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. VS. Union of India (2004) 134 Taxman 1 (Bom) has held that the definition of `member’ given in section 2(19) of the Maharashtra Act takes within its sweep even a nominal member and there is no distinction between a duly registered member and nominal member. In view of the above discussion, we overturn the impugned order and direct to grant deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i), as claimed by the assessee.

6.

In the result, the appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21st June, 2021. (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; ददिधांक Dated : 21st June, 2021 GCVSR

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपीऱधर्थी / The Appellant; 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent;

2.3.

The CIT(Appeal)-2, Nagpur

4.

The Pr. CIT-2, Nagpur

5.

The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, //// Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

Date

1.

Draft dictated on 21-06-2021 Sr.PS

2.

Draft placed before author 21-06-2021 Sr.PS

3.

Draft proposed & placed JM before the second member

4.

Draft discussed/approved JM by Second Member.

5.

Approved Draft comes to Sr.PS the Sr.PS/PS

6.

Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS

7.

Date of uploading order Sr.PS

8.

File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS

9.

Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk

10.

Date on which file goes to the A.R.

11.

Date of dispatch of Order. *

More judgments on Section 80P(2)(a)(i)

All 2,347 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P(2)(a)(i) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →