OORUTTAMBALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD vs. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the rectification order passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Ext.P5) was patently incorrect. The Court reasoned that the Supreme Court's declaration of law in Mavilayi 2021, which restored the position laid down in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., has retrospective effect. Therefore, the Appellate Authority had no option but to follow the Supreme Court's ruling. The initial decision of the Appellate Authority, which allowed the deduction under Section 80P based on the Chirakkal judgment, was correct in light of the Supreme Court's final verdict. Consequently, the rectification order was set aside as it was against the law declared by the Supreme Court. The Court also noted that since Ext.P5 was being set aside, the original order of the Appellate Authority would revive, obviating the need for a reconsideration order.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Ooruttambalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., is a co-operative society that claimed deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2014-15. The Income Tax Officer rejected this claim, finding the petitioner was not a primary agricultural credit society. The petitioner appealed, and the Appellate Authority initially allowed the appeal, relying on the High Court's decision in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. Subsequently, a Full Bench of the High Court overruled Chirakkal. The Appellate Authority then rectified its earlier order under Section 154, holding the petitioner ineligible for the deduction. This rectification order is challenged in the present writ petition, especially in light of a Supreme Court judgment that reversed the Full Bench decision and restored the law laid down in Chirakkal.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the rectification order passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is valid, considering the subsequent Supreme Court judgment that altered the legal position. Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. (2021) effectively means the law declared by it relates back to the time the relevant section was in force. Therefore, the Appellate Authority's initial order, which allowed the deduction based on the Chirakkal judgment (later upheld by the Supreme Court), was correct, and the subsequent rectification under Section 154 was erroneous. The assessee relies on the Supreme Court's pronouncement that for Section 80P eligibility, it is sufficient to be a co-operative society providing credit facilities to its members, without further classification, and that Section 80P should be construed to further the co-operative movement generally. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record specific contentions made by the revenue in response to the 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 Co-operative Society, which claims to be entitled to the benefit of deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act,1961 (for short 'the Act') for the assessment year 2014-15. The claim for deduction was rejected after finding that petitioner is not a primary agricultural credit society. The order of assessment was challenged in appeal by the petitioner.
Relying upon the decision of this Court in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., Kannur v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2016 (2) KHC 726), the Appellate Authority allowed the appeal and set aside the assessment order. In the meantime, the decision in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., Kannur v. Commissioner of Income Tax (supra) was referred for consideration before a Full Bench of this Court. By judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut (2019 (2) KHC 287), the Full Bench declared that the law laid down by the Division Bench in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., Kannur v. Commissioner of Income Tax (supra) was not good law and overruled the same.
On noticing the reversal of the law, the Appellate Authority relying upon the decision of this Court in Kil Kotagiri Tea & Coffee Estates Co. Ltd. v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (1989 (42) Taxman 33) held that its earlier decision in the statutory appeal amounted to a mistake apparent on the face of the record due to the subsequent decision rendered by the Full Bench and therefore constitutes a ground for rectification under section 154 of the Act. Thereafter the Appellate Authority, in exercise of the powers of rectification held that the petitioner was not entitled for the deduction claimed under section 80P of the Act on the ground that the certificate produced from the Registrar of Co-operative Societies was not sufficient to treat the petitioner as a primary agricultural credit society. The said order of rectification under section 154 of the Act issued by the Appellate Authority is impugned in this writ petition.
It is necessary to mention that, in the meantime, the Full Bench decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut (supra) was reversed by the Supreme Court and held that the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in (2019 (2) KHC 287) does not lay down the correct law and restored the position of law as declared by Chirakkal Service Co- operative Bank Ltd., Kannur v. Commissioner of Income Tax (supra). The present writ petition is filed, in view of the change of law, brought in on account of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2021 (1) KLT 485) (hereinafter referred to as Mavilayi 2021).
In the aforesaid judgment, the Supreme court held that for the purpose of eligibility for deduction under section 80P, the assessee must be a co-operative society, and for that purpose, it was unnecessary to prove any further as to whether the co-operative society is classified as 'X' or 'Y'. It was also held that the expression 'providing credit facilities to its members' does not necessarily mean an agricultural credit alone and that section 80P being a beneficial provision, must be construed with the object of furthering the co- operative movement generally.
In view of the declaration of law by the Supreme Court in Mavilayi 2021, the rectification carried out by the Appellate Authority is patently incorrect. There was no option for the Appellate Authority to resort to section 154 since by virtue of declaration of law by the Supreme Court, it is presumed that the said declaration relates back to the time from which the section was in force. Viewed in such a manner, the judgment of the Appellate Authority at the first instance relying upon the decision in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., Kannur v. Commissioner of Income Tax (supra) holding that petitioner was entitled for deduction under section 80P is correct.
Therefore Ext.P5 is liable to be set aside it being against the law declared by the Supreme Court. I do so.
Since this Court is setting aside Ext.P5, the order of the Appellate Authority at the first instance will revive and hence there is no requirement to direct a reconsideration. This writ petition is allowed as above. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE vps
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 Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- Prashanti Das (M/S. Panchamukhi Enterprises) vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026