Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & 523/Mum/2023 (A.Ys: 2018-19 & 2019-20) MaladKokilCo-operative Vs. ITO, Ward 41(3)(2), Housing Society, DGIT(Vig)(West), S-2, Ground Floor, Mumbai-400020. Sunder Nagar, SV Road, Malad (W), Mumbai -400064. �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAEAM8796J Appellant .. Respondent Assessee by : Shri. Kirit sanghavi.AR Revenue by : Smt.Jayashree Thakur.DR Date of Hearing 25.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement 27.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R The two appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) – Delhi / CIT(A) u/sec 250 of the Act.
Since the issues in these appeals are common and identical, hence are clubbed, heard and consolidated order is passed. & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 2 -
For the sake of convenience, we shall take up the for the A.Y.2019-20 as a lead case and the facts narrated. The assessee has raised the fallowing grounds of appeal:
1. The learned CIT(A) [Faceless Appeal Scheme] erred in law and on facts in disallowing deduction of Rs.5,79,199/- under s.80P(2)(d) of the Act. Relief claimed: Deduction of Rs.5,79, 199/- be allowed under s.80P(2)(d) of the Act.
2. The learned CIT(A) [Faceless Appeal Scheme] erred in law and on facts in confirming that the accounts of the Appellant were not liable to be audited as a result of which, the appellant was not entitled to deduction in view of s.80P(2)(d) read with s.80AC of the Act. Relief claimed: Deduction of Rs.5,79,199/- be allowed under s.80P(2)(d) of the Act.
The brief facts of the case are that the assesse is a cooperative Housing society and derives income from house property maintenance and income from other sources. The assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y 2019-20 on 30-10-2019 disclosing a total income of Rs.20,110/-after claiming deduction u/s 80(P)(2)(d) of the act of Rs. 5,79,199/-, subsequently the return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Whereas the AO has not allowed deduction of claim u/s 80(P)(2)(d) of the Act as the assessee is not & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 3 - entitled for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act and the sources of income being interest on loan to members, maintenance charges and fixed deposits in cooperative banks. The assessee has disclosed the interest income of Rs.5,99,313/- and claimed deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act of Rs.5,79,199/-. Finally the A.O was not satisfied with the claim made by the assessee and is of the opinion that the cooperative bank is an urban commercial bank and does not fall under the purview of cooperative society referred in the Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act and therefore the interest income from cooperative banks has to be taxed under income from other sources and assessed the total income of Rs.5,99,310/-and passed the order u/s 143(1) of the Act dated 16.03.2020.
Aggrieved by the order the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A). Whereas the CIT(A) considered the grounds of appeal, submissions of the assessee and findings of the AO.The CIT(A) has observed that the assessee has not filed the return of income within the due date allowed under section 139(1) of the Act, therefore the claim cannot be allowed and also the assessee is not entitled for & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 4 - deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act and dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal.
5. At the time of hearing the Ld. AR submitted that, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO and treating the interest income from cooperative banks is ineligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act and the assessee has filed the submissions before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) observed that the assessee has not filed the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. The Ld. AR has submitted the chart of interest income along with the copy of CBDT order on extension of due date for the A.Y 2019-20 from 30.09.2019 to 31.10.2019.The Ld.AR emphasized that the claim has to be allowed as the cooperative bank is treated as cooperative society for eligibility of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act and supported the submissions with the judicial decisions and paper book. Contra, the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 5 -
Heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole matrix of the disputed issue emphasized by the Ld.AR is in respect of granting of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act to the Cooperative Society. The Ld. AR submitted that the interest income derived by a co-operative society from its deposits with the co-operative bank would be entitled for deduction U/sec 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The co-operative bank continues to be a co-operative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act. The Ld.AR has demonstrated the facts of earning of interest on fixed deposits and utilization with audited financial statements placed at page4to13 of the paper book. The Coordinate Bench of the Honble Tribunal in M/s Petit Towers Co-operative Housing Society Ltd Vs. ITO in dated 1-09-2021 has dealt on the taxability of interest earned on the deposits with the Co-operative Banks at page 6 Para 8 of the order, which is read as under:
8. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the contentions advanced by the ld. Authorized representatives for both the parties in context of the aforesaid issue under consideration. As stated by the ld. A.R, and rightly so, the issue that interest received by a co-operative society on its deposits with co-operative & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 6 - banks would be eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act is covered in assessee‟s favour by orders of the various coordinate benches of the Tribunal in the following cases :
(i). M/s Solitaire CHS Ltd. Vs. Pr.CIT-26, Mumbai, dated 29.11.2019 (ii). Land and Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO (2017) 46 CCH 52 (Mum.)
(iii). M/s C. Green Cooperative Housing and Society Ltd. Vs. ITO-21(3)(2), Mumbai (ITA No. 1343/Mum/2017, dated 31.03.2017.
(iv). Marvwanjee Cama Park Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO-Range 20(2)(2), Mumbai (ITA NO. 6139/Mum/2014, dated 27.09.2017.
(v). Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Pemises Co-op. Society Ltd. Vs. ITO, 21(2)(1), Mumbai.
In the aforesaid orders, it has been held by the Tribunal that though the cooperative banks pursuant to the insertion of sub-section (4) to Sec. 80P of the Act would no more be entitled for claim of deduction u/s 80P of the Act, but as a co-operative bank continues to be a co-operative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912) or under any other law for the time being in force in any State for the registration of co- operative societies, therefore, the interest income derived by a co-operative society from its investments held with a co-operative bank would be entitled for claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find that the aforesaid issue had exhaustively been looked into by the ITAT, „G‟ bench, Mumbai in the case of M/s Solitaire CHS Ltd, Vs. Pr.CIT-26, Mumbai dated & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 7 - 29.11.2019, wherein the Tribunal had observed as under :
“6. We have heard the authorised representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, as well as the judicial pronouncements relied upon by them. Our indulgence in the present appeal has been sought, for adjudicating, as to whether the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest income earned from the investments/deposits made with the co-operative banks is in order, or not. In our considered view, the issue involved in the present appeal revolves around the adjudication of the scope and gamut of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P as had been made available on the statute, vide the Finance Act 2006, with effect from 01.04.2007. On a perusal of the order passed by the Pr. CIT under Sec. 263 of the Act, we find, that he was of the view that pursuant to insertion of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P, the assessee would no more be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) in respect of the interest income that was earned on the amounts which were parked as investments/deposits with co-operative banks, other than a Primary Agricultural Credit Society or a Primary Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank. Observing, that the co-operative banks from where the assessee was in receipt of interest income were not co-operative societies, the Pr. CIT was of the view that the interest income earned on such investments/deposits would not be eligible for deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act.
After necessary deliberations, we are unable to persuade ourselves to be in agreement with the view taken by the Pr. CIT. Before proceeding any further, we may herein reproduce the relevant extract of the aforesaid & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 8 - statutory provision, viz. Sec. 80P(2)(d), as the same would have a strong bearing on the adjudication of the issue before us.
“80P(2)(d)
(1). Where in the case of an assessee being a co-operative society, the gross total income includes any income referred to in sub-section (2), there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section, the sums specified in subsection (2), in computing the total income of the assessee.
(2). The sums referred to in sub-section (1) shall be the following, namely :- (a).......................................................... (b)..........................................................
(c)......................................................
(d) in respect of any income by way of interest or dividends derived by the co-operative society from its investments with any other co-operative society, the whole of such income;”
On a perusal of Sec. 80P(2)(d), it can safely be gathered that interest income derived by an assessee co-operative society from its investments held with any other co- operative society shall be deducted in computing its total income. We may herein observe, that what is relevant for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) is that the interest income should have been derived from the investments made by the assessee co-operative society with any other co-operative society. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Pr. CIT, that with the insertion of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P, vide the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from 01.04.2007, the provisions of Sec. 80P would no & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 9 - more be applicable in relation to any co-operative bank, other than a primary agricultural credit society or a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank. However, at the same time, we are unable to subscribe to his view that the aforesaid amendment would jeopardize the claim of deduction of a co-operative society under Sec. 80P(2)(d) in respect of its interest income on investments/deposits parked with a co- operative bank. In our considered view, as long as it is proved that the interest income is being derived by a co- operative society from its investments made with any other co-operative society, the claim of deduction under the aforesaid statutory provision, viz. Sec. 80P(2)(d) would be duly available. We find that the term „cooperative society‟ had been defined under Sec. 2(19) of the Act, as under:-
“(19) “Co-operative society” means a cooperative society registered under the Cooperative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912), or under any other law for the time being in force in any state for the registration of co-operative societies;”
We are of the considered view, that though the co- operative banks pursuant to the insertion of subsection (4) to Sec. 80P would no more be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P of the Act, but as a co-operative bank continues to be a co-operative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912), or under any other law for the time being in force in any State for the registration of co-operative societies, therefore, the interest income derived by a co-operative society from its investments held with a co-operative bank & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 10 - would be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act.
We shall now advert to the judicial pronouncements that have been relied upon by the ld. A.R. We find that the issue that a co-operative society would be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) on the interest income derived from its investments held with a co- operative bank is covered in favour of the assessee in the following cases: (i) Land and Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO (2017) 46 CCH 52 (Mum) (ii) M/s C. Green Cooperative Housing and Society Ltd. Vs. ITO-21(3)(2), Mumbai (ITA No. 1343/Mum/2017, dated 31.03.2017 (iii) Marvwanjee Cama Park Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO-Range-20(2)(2), Mumbai (ITA No. 6139/Mum/2014, dated 27.09.2017. (iv). Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Pemises Co-op. Society Ltd. Vs. ITO, 21(2)(1), Mumbai. We further find that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon‟ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had held, that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006, also makes it clear beyond any scope of doubt that the purpose behind enactment of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P was that the co-operative banks which were functioning at par with other banks would no more be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(4) of the Act. Insofar the reliance placed by the Pr. CIT on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Co- & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 11 - operative Sale Society Ltd. vs. ITO (2010) 322 ITR 283 (SC) is concerned, we are of the considered view that the same being distinguishable on facts had wrongly been relied upon by him. The adjudication by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the aforesaid case was in context of Sec. 80P(2)(a)(i), and not on the entitlement of a co-operative society towards deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) on the interest income on the investments/deposits parked with a co-operative bank. Although, in all fairness, we may herein observe that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Totagars co-operative Sale Society (2017) 395 ITR 611 (Karn), had concluded that a co-operative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). At the same time, we find, that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon‟ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had observed, that the interest income earned by a co-operative society 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 Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon‟ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 12 - Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), wherein it was observed that the interest income earned by a cooperative society on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act.
Be that as it may, in our considered view, as the A.O while framing the assessment had taken a possible view, and therein concluded that the assessee would be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) on the interest income earned on its investments/deposits with co-operative banks, therefore, the Pr. CIT was in error in exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 for dislodging the same. In fact, as observed by us hereinabove, the aforesaid view taken by the A.O at the time of framing of the assessment was clearly supported by the order of the jurisdictional Tribunal in the case of Land and Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO (2017) 46 CCH 52 (Mum). Accordingly, finding no justification on the part of the Pr. CIT, who in exercise of his powers under Sec. 263, had dislodged the view that was taken by the A.O as regards the eligibility of the assessee towards claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d), we „set aside‟ his order and restore the order passed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3), date 14.09.2016.
As the facts and the issue involved in the present case before us remains the same as were there before the Tribunal in the case of M/s Solitaire CHS Ltd. (supra), wherein the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s 263 of the Act was quashed, we, thus, respectfully follow the same. Backed by our aforesaid deliberations, we are unable to uphold the view taken by the Pr. CIT that the failure on the part of the A.O to be disallow the assessee‟s claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) had rendered the assessment order passed by him u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 13 - 31.08.2017 as erroneous in so far it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.
Accordingly, on the basis of our aforesaid observations, we herein not finding favor with the view taken by the Pr. CIT that the order passed by the A.O u/s 143(3), dated 31.08.2017 was erroneous in so far it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue within the meaning of Sec. 263 of the Act set-aside the same and restore the order passed by the A.O u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 31.08.2017.
7. Considering the facts, circumstances and the ratio of the judicial decisions. The Honble Tribunal has passed the order in the context of the revision order U/sec263 of the Act and relied on the catena of Honble High court and Tribunal decisions were the co-operative society receives/earns interest on deposits with the co-operative bank is eligible for claim of deduction under section 80(2)(d) of the Act. TheLd.AR substantiated the submissions with the facts, evidences and judicial decisions filed before the lower authorities. Accordingly, the order of the CIT(A) is set-aside and direct the Assessing officer to allow the claim of deduction u/sec80P(2)(d) of the Act on the interest income received /earned from the co- operative banks. And the grounds of appeal are allowed in favour of the assessee. & 523/Mum/2023 Malad Kokil Co.Operative Housing Society Ltd. Mumbai. - 14 - (A.Y 2018-19) 8. As the facts and circumstances in these appeals are identical to for the A.Y 2019- 20 (except variance in figures) and the decision rendered in above paragraphs would apply mutatis mutandis for this appeal also. Accordingly, grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed.
9 In the result, the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed Order pronounced in the open court on 27.04.2023.