THE POLPULLY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court did not decide the merits of the case. Instead, it deemed it fit to dispose of the writ petition by directing the competent Appellate Authority (the first respondent) to consider the pending appeal (Ext.P3) in a time-bound manner. The Court directed the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the appeal as expeditiously as possible. 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 petitioner satisfied the ingredients of a Primary Agricultural Credit Society and the applicability of the Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. judgment were not decided by the High Court.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, The Polpully Service Co-operative Bank Limited, is a Primary Agricultural Credit Society. The Assessing Officer issued an assessment order on March 31, 2021, rejecting the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P. The reason for rejection was the absence of evidence demonstrating that the petitioner met the criteria 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), the first respondent. The petitioner argued that the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax now governs such cases, rendering the assessment incorrect. An appeal (Ext.P3) was filed and was pending before the first respondent.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the assessment order dated March 31, 2021, rejecting the deduction under Section 80P on the ground of insufficient evidence regarding the petitioner's status as a Primary Agricultural Credit Society, is valid in light of the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner contended that the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax governs the present case and renders the assessment order incorrect. The petitioner relied on this Supreme Court judgment. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue in response to the petitioner's arguments before the High Court. The revenue was represented by counsel.
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 31.03.2021. 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. 21093 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. 21093 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 →- M/S Dc Security Services vs. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shreekanth Enterprises vs. Joint Commissioner AppealsUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- Sharad Ashok Agarwal vs. State Of Maharashtra Through G.P. And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Md. Akhtar Ansari, Proprietor Of M/S Indian Associates vs. State Of Jharkhand, Through Commissioner Of State Tax, Commercial Tax Dept.Jharkhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Amarjothi Granites (INDIA) PVT. LTD., Berhampur, Ganjam vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026