THE ELAPPULLY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Kerala did not decide the merits of the case. Instead, it observed that the petitioner had already preferred an appeal (Ext.P3) before the first respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which was pending consideration. Therefore, the Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the competent Appellate Authority to consider the pending appeal in a time-bound manner. The Court directed the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 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. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the Court's action was procedural.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Elappully Service Co-operative Bank Limited, a Primary Agricultural Credit Society, received an assessment order dated 04.02.2021. The Assessing Officer rejected the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P, stating there was no evidence that the petitioner met the criteria for a Primary Agricultural Credit Society under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner challenged this assessment order by filing an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the first respondent. The petitioner argued that the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2021) governed the situation and rendered the assessment incorrect. The appeal was pending before the first respondent.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the assessment order dated 04.02.2021, which rejected the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P on the grounds that it did not satisfy the ingredients of a Primary Agricultural Credit Society as contemplated under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, is legally sustainable, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2021 (1) KLT 485]? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969). Assessee's contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was incorrect as the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2021 (1) KLT 485] now governs the field, implying that the assessment should have considered this precedent. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue in this writ petition.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
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 on 04.02.2021. 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.
While assailing the assessment order before the 1st 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.
Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as Ext.P3 and the same is pending consideration before the 1st respondent, I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of directing the competent Appellate Authority to consider the appeal in a time bound manner.
WP(C) NO. 21260 OF 2022 3
Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent / competent Appellate Authority to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3, as expeditiously as possible.
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. GOPINATH P. JUDGE DK
WP(C) NO. 21260 OF 2022 4
Appendix — schedule of exhibits
More judgments on Section 80P
- Shree Bandharda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd… vs Income Tax Officer Ward -4, JunagadhITA 881/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Duddukuru Primary Agricultural Cooperative… vs ITO, Ward - 1, TadepalligudemITA 258/VIZ/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Jijamata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari… vs ITO Ward -1, BhandraITA 102/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Shri Na vs Ari Khedut Sahkari Society Ltd…ITA 362/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dipak Saikia vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Saraswati Phukan vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 14 Oct 2026