AVANANKUZHI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/1508/2022HC KeralaKLHC01003541202217 January 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court did not decide the merits of the case. Instead, it acknowledged that the petitioner had already filed an appeal (Ext.P3) before the 2nd respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)), which was pending. Therefore, the Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the Appellate Authority to consider the pending appeal in a time-bound manner. The Court directed the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 as expeditiously as possible. Additionally, the Court ordered that no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) until the appeal is decided. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the Court's action was procedural.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Avanankuzhi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., a Primary Agricultural Credit Society, received an assessment order dated August 30, 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 Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner filed an appeal against this assessment order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner argued that the assessing officer failed to consider the Supreme Court judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut and Others, which was rendered prior to the assessment order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessing officer erred in rejecting the deduction under Section 80P without considering the Supreme Court judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut and Others? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 80P of the Income Tax Act). Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed subsequent to the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut and Others, and that this crucial judgment was not considered by the assessing officer. The petitioner relied on the Supreme Court judgment. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue in response to 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
WP(C) NO. 1508 OF 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 27TH POUSHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 1508 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S: AVANANKUZHI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.2387, AVANANKUZHI, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.S JAYASEREE, W/O BIJU RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT VARUTHATTIL, MANGALATH KONAM, KATTACHALKUZHI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT BY ADVS. BABU S. NAIR SMITHA BABU RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTER, ROOM NO.356, CR BUILDING, IP ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110 002 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTER, ROOM NO.356, CR BUILDING, IP ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110 002 OTHER PRESENT: ADV.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM-SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 1508 OF 2022 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C).No.1508 of 2022 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 17th day of January, 2022

JUDGMENT Petitioner is a Primary Agricultural Credit Society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. Ext.P1 order of assessment was issued against the petitioner on 30.08.2021. 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 Co-operative Societies Act.

2.

While assailing the assessment order before the 2nd respondent Appellate Authority, petitioner has sought to canvass that the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mavilayi Service Co- operative Bank and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut and Others [2021 (1) KLT 485] was not considered by the assessing officer though the assessment order was rendered subsequent to the Supreme Court judgment.

3.

Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as Ext.P3 and the same is pending consideration before the 2nd

WP(C) NO. 1508 OF 2022 respondent, I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of directing the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal in a time bound manner.

4.

Accordingly there will a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3, as expeditiously as possible.

5.

Till such time, no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order. The writ petition is disposed of as above. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE jm/

WP(C) NO. 1508 OF 2022

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1508/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED, 30.8.2021 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED , 30.8.2021 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE APPELLANT AGAINST EXHIBIT P1 ASSESSMENT ORDER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 16.10.2021 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR STAY PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND 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 →