THE KAZHAKUTTAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1457, vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/25905/2024HC KeralaKLHC01123821202419 July 2024Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the merits of the appeal. Instead, it noted that the petitioner had already preferred an appeal (Ext.P2) before the 3rd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) which was pending consideration. Therefore, the Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal in a time-bound manner. The Court directed the 3rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 expeditiously. Furthermore, the Court ordered that no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) until the disposal of the appeal. The issue of whether the Supreme Court judgment was considered by the assessing officer was not decided by the High Court.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Kazhakkuttam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., a co-operative society, received an assessment order dated March 15, 2024. The assessing officer rejected the petitioner's claim for deduction, stating that its income was not eligible for deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner appealed this order to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). In its appeal, the petitioner argued that the assessing officer failed to consider the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, 2021 (1) KLT 485, despite the assessment order being issued after this judgment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order dated March 15, 2024, passed by the assessing officer, properly considered the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485, in rejecting the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 80P of the Income Tax Act). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that the assessing officer failed to consider the Supreme Court judgment in Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485, despite the assessment order being passed subsequent to it. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue regarding this issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 28TH ASHADHA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 25905 OF 2024 PETITIONER/S: THE KAZHAKUTTAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1457, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KAZHAKUTTAM P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695582 BY ADVS. ARJUN RAGHAVAN T.R.HARIKUMAR POOJA PANKAJ RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, ROOM NO 401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, DELHI, PIN - 110003 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (1), OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695003 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NORTH BLOCK, DELHI, PIN - 110001 OTHER PRESENT: SRI. JOSE JOSEPH (SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P (C) No.25905/2024 -2-= J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a Co-operative Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. Exhibit P1 order of assessment was issued against the petitioner on 15-03-2024. In the assessment order, petitioner's claim for deduction was rejected on the ground that the income of the petitioner is not eligible for deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. 2. While assailing the assessment order before the 3rd respondent, petitioner has sought to canvass that the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485 was not considered by the assessing officer though the assessment order was rendered subsequent to the Supreme Court Judgment. 3. Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as Ext.P2 and the same is pending consideration before the 3rd respondent, I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of directing the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal in a time bound manner. 4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2, as expeditiously as possible. 5. Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P1. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE AMG

W.P (C) No.25905/2024 -3-= APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25905/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P1 A TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 15-03-2024, ALONG WITH DEMAND NOTICE AND COMPUTATION STATEMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2022-2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit-P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPEAL DATED 17-05-2024 FILED AGAINST EXT-P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT, ALONG WITH STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL Exhibit-P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 17-05-2024, FILED IN EXT-P2 APPEAL Exhibit-P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 17-05-2024 Exhibit-P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19-07-2019 IN W.A NO.1639 OF 2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT Exhibit-P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14-01-2022 IN WP(C) NO.30579 OF 2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT Exhibit-P7 A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 23-02-2022 IN WP(C) NO.6109 OF 2022 Exhibit-P8 A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 05-09-2023 IN WP(C) NO.29098 OF 2023

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →