CIT, JALANDHAR vs. M/S SHIVALIK KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK HOSHIARPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA/596/2009HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01084720200902 February 2010Author: MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR,MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Tribunal was correct in dismissing the revenue's appeals. The Court relied on its own prior judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nawanshahar Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., [2003] 263 ITR 320. In that case, the Court had held that interest income on investments in Government securities, debentures, bonds, Kisan Vikas Patras, and C.D. of IDBI was admissible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). The Court had reasoned that these investments were statutory in nature, in accordance with Section 44 of the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. The High Court noted that the Supreme Court had dismissed a Special Leave Petition against the Nawanshahar judgment. Furthermore, a Division Bench of the High Court had already dismissed a similar appeal filed by the appellant-revenue against the same assessee in ITA No. 314 of 2005 on August 1, 2006. Therefore, following its own precedents and the dismissal of the SLP, the appeals were dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar) filed three appeals (ITA Nos. 594, 595, and 596 of 2009) against a common order dated April 16, 2009, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Amritsar Bench. These appeals pertained to Assessment Years 2002-03 to 2004-05 and challenged the ITAT's decision to dismiss the revenue's appeals concerning the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P. The assessee is M/s Shivalik Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Hoshiarpur. The core dispute revolves around the eligibility of interest earned on certain investments for deduction under Section 80P.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide two questions of law: 1. Whether the Tribunal was right in dismissing the revenue's appeal on the issue of disallowance of deduction under Section 80P on interest earned from investments of surplus reserves, where such investments are not governed by statutory provisions for carrying on the business of banking, as per Section 80P(2)(a)(i). 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in dismissing the revenue's appeal on the issue of disallowance of deduction under Section 80P on interest earned from the utilization of voluntary reserves (other than statutory reserves), considering the Supreme Court's decision in Mehsana District Co-op Bank Ltd. v. ITO, 251 ITR 522. The Revenue contended that deductions under Section 80P should not be allowed on interest from non-statutory investments. The Assessee argued for the admissibility of the deduction. The Tribunal had dismissed the revenue's appeals on these grounds.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 80P(2)(a)(i),Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of Decision: February 2, 2010 Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar …Appellant Versus M/s Shivalik Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Hoshiarpur …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present: Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocate, for the appellant-revenue.

1.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

2.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. By this order we propose to dispose of ITA Nos. 594, 595 and 596 of 2009 because the same have been filed under Section 260A of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) against the common order dated 16.4.2009, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (for brevity, ‘the Tribunal’) in ITA Nos. 107 to 109 (ASR)/2009, in respect of As- sessment Years 2002-03 to 2004-05. The following questions of law have been sought to be raised for determination of this Court:- “(i) Whether the Tribunal was right in dismissing the appeal of the revenue on the issue of disallowance of deduction under Section 80P on interest earned on investment of surplus re- serve where such investment is not governed by any statutory provisions for carrying on the business of Banking? (ii) Whether the Tribunal was right in dismissing the appeal of the revenue on the issue of disallowance of deduction under Section 80P on interest earned from utilisation of voluntary reserves other than statutory reserves when Hon’ble the Su- preme Court has set aside the similar issue to the file of CIT (A) in the case of Mehsana District Co-op Bank Ltd. v. ITO, 251 ITR 522?” The matter is no longer res integra. This Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nawanshahar Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., [2003] 263 ITR 320, has held that deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, on account of interest income on Government securities, debentures, bonds, Kisan Vikas Patras and C.D. of IDBI was admissible. The investment in the said bonds has been held to be statutory investment in accordance with Sec- tion 44 of the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 and, thus, eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The view taken by the Tribu- nal is in accordance with the above judgment of this Court. It is also conceded position that the Special Leave Petition against the aforementioned judgment of this Court, has been dismissed by Hon’ble the Supreme Court. Moreover, a Di- vision Bench of this Court has already dismissed a similar appeal, bearing ITA No. 314 of 2005, on 1.8.2006, which was filed by the appellant-revenue against the assessee-respondent. Accordingly, these appeals fails and the same are dis- missed. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of all the con- nected appeals. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (AJAY TEWARI) February 2, 2010 JUDGE Pkapoor 2

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →