THE CHENTRAPPINNI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.R.276 vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/955/2023HC KeralaKLHC01002330202312 January 2023Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala did not decide the merits of the assessment order or the applicability of the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. Instead, the Court acknowledged that the petitioner had already filed an appeal (Ext.P3) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (1st respondent) and that this appeal was pending. The Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the Tribunal to consider and pass appropriate orders on the pending appeal expeditiously. The Tribunal was directed to dispose of the appeal within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the Court ordered that no coercive steps would be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) until the disposal of the appeal. The issue of whether the petitioner satisfied the ingredients of a Primary Agricultural Credit Society and the consequential deduction under Section 80P was therefore left to be decided by the Tribunal.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Centrappinni Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., a Primary Agricultural Credit Society, received an assessment order (Ext.P1) from the Income Tax Officer (3rd respondent). The assessment rejected the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ground for rejection was the alleged lack of evidence that the petitioner satisfied the ingredients of a Primary Agricultural Credit Society as defined under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner challenged this assessment order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (1st respondent) by filing an appeal (Ext.P3). The petitioner argued that the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485 now governed the field and rendered the assessment incorrect. This writ petition was filed before the High Court of Kerala seeking a direction for the expeditious disposal of the pending appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order rejecting the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P is valid, considering the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was incorrect because the Supreme Court's decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485 governs the present case, implying that the deduction under Section 80P should have been allowed. The petitioner relied on this Supreme Court judgment. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue in this writ petition. The revenue was represented by counsel, but their arguments on the merits of the assessment are not detailed in the provided text.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 22ND POUSHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 955 OF 2023 PETITIONER: THE CHENTRAPPINNI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.R.276 CHENTRAPPINNI.P.O, THRISSR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY., PIN - 680687 BY ADV P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, ROOM NO. 356, C.R. BUILDING, IP ESTATE, DELHI, PIN - 110002 2 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX O/O THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE, KERALA , PIN - 673001 3 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), THRISSUR, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR, PIN - 680101 BY ADV JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P. (C) No. 955 of 2023 ..2..

JUDGMENT Petitioner is a Primary Agricultural Credit Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. Ext.P1 order of assessment was issued against the petitioner. In the assessment order, petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P was rejected on the ground that there was no evidence to show that petitioner satisfied the ingredients of the Primary Agricultural Credit Society as contemplated under the Kerala Co-operative Societies 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 Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485 now governs the field thereby rendering the assessment itself as incorrect.

3.

Since the petitioner has already preferred an ..3.. appeal as Ext.P3 and the same is pending consideration before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (1st respondent), I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of directing the Tribunal to consider the appeal in a time bound manner.

4.

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3, as expeditiously as possible within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

5.

Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P1 order of assessment . The writ petition is disposed of as above. GOPINATH P. JUDGE RMV ..4..

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 955/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 . THE TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020-2021 DATED 09/09/2022 Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 09/09/2022 Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 07/10/2022 Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 06/10/2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO.1536 OF 2019 DATED 1/7/2019 Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C) NO.14282/2021 DATED 19/7/2021 Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C) NO. 34067/2022 DATED 27/10/2022 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →