M/S. SHORANUR GOVERNMENT PRESS EMPLOYEES : PETITIONER COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO.910 vs. 1. ADDITIONAL /JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/41511/2022HC KeralaKLHC01090087202221 December 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the merits of the case. Instead, it noted that the petitioner had already preferred an appeal (Ext.P2) against the assessment order (Ext.P1) before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), and this appeal was pending. 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 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) 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 Ext.P1 assessment order until the disposal of the appeal. No specific finding was made on the issue of Section 80P deduction or the applicability of the Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. judgment.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Shoranur Government Press Employees Co-operative Society Ltd. No. 910, is a Primary Agricultural Credit Society. The Assessing Officer passed an assessment order on September 23, 2022, rejecting the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P. The reason for rejection was the absence of evidence demonstrating that the petitioner satisfied the criteria of a Primary Agricultural Credit Society as defined by the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner filed an appeal against this assessment order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner contends that the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax governs the situation and renders the assessment incorrect.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order dated 23.09.2022, which rejected the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P on the grounds that the petitioner did not satisfy the ingredients of a Primary Agricultural Credit Society, is legally sustainable? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 80P of the Income Tax Act). Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argues that the assessment order is incorrect, relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, which they contend governs the present case. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions 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

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 41511 OF 2022 PETITIONER: M/S. SHORANUR GOVERNMENT PRESS EMPLOYEES : PETITIONER COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO.910 AGED 44 YEARS SHORANUR GOVERNMENT PRESS PO PALAKKAD, KERALA-679122, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SMT. SUPREETHA K., D/O. SADANANDAN, PIN - 679122 BY ADVS. V.P.NARAYANAN ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV RESPONDENTS: 1 1. ADDITIONAL /JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, ROOM NO.401, 2ND FLOOR, E-RAMP, JAWAHARLAL STADIUM, DELHI-110 003., PIN - 110003 2 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, NEW DELHI-110 003. , PIN - 110003 ADV. JOSE JOSEPH STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.41511/2022 -:2:- JUDGMENT Dated this the 21st day of December, 2022 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 on 23.09.2022. 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 1st respondent, petitioner has sought to canvas 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 appeal as Ext.P2 and the same is pending consideration before the 2nd respondent, I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of directing the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal in a time W.P.(C) No.41511/2022 -:3:- bound manner. 4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2nd 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 assessment order. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE AP W.P.(C) No.41511/2022 -:4:- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 41511/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P1

DATED 23-9-2022 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020-21 Exhibit-P2OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 18-10-2022 BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT Exhibit-P3OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 13-10-2022 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →