THE PAVARATTY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.3918 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Kerala did not decide the merits of the appeal. Instead, it directed the 3rd respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), to consider and pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's pending appeal (Ext.P3) expeditiously, within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Court also 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 primary issue of the Section 80P deduction and the applicability of the Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. judgment were thus left to be decided by the appellate authority.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, The Pavaratty Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. No. 3918, a Primary Agricultural Credit Society, is challenging an assessment order (Ext.P1). The assessment order rejected the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P. The reason for rejection was the alleged lack of evidence demonstrating that the petitioner satisfied the criteria of a Primary Agricultural Credit Society as defined under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner had filed an appeal (Ext.P3) against this assessment order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who is the 3rd respondent. This appeal was pending consideration. The petitioner also argued that the Supreme Court judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485 now governs the field, rendering the assessment incorrect.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the assessment order rejecting the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P is valid, considering the petitioner's status as a Primary Agricultural Credit Society under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner contends that the assessment order is incorrect because the Supreme Court judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax; 2021 (1) KLT 485 governs the field. This judgment likely supports the claim for deduction for such societies. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue in this writ petition. The assessment order itself rejected the deduction on the ground that the petitioner did not provide evidence to satisfy the ingredients of a Primary Agricultural Credit Society under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
J U D G M E N T 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.
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.
Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as Ext.P3 and the same is pending consideration before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (3rd respondent), I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of directing the Tribunal to consider the appeal in a time bound manner.
Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 3rd 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.
.
Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be -3- initiated against the petitioner pursuant to Exts.P1. The writ petition is disposed of as above. GOPINATH P. JUDGE TR -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 Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Laxman Singh Yadav vs. Bank Of BarodaMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Surendra Singh Rathore vs. Idfc First Bank Through Branch ManagerMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
