THE THIROOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO 4140, vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Kerala, while acknowledging that the petitioner had already preferred appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the relevant assessment years, deemed it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the Appellate Authority to consider these appeals in a time-bound manner. The Court directed the first respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)) to consider and pass appropriate orders on the pending appeals (Exts.P3, P10, and P17) as expeditiously as possible. Furthermore, the Court granted an interim relief, stating that no coercive steps would be initiated against the petitioner pursuant to the assessment orders (Exts.P1, P8, and P15) until the disposal of the appeals. The Court did not decide on the merits of the Section 80P deduction claim itself, leaving that to the appellate authority.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, The Thiroor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, a Primary Agricultural Credit Society, received assessment orders on September 28, 2021, for assessment years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, and 2015-2016. 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 argued that the assessing officer failed to properly consider the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut and Others, which was delivered prior to the assessment orders. The petitioner had already filed appeals against the assessment orders before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
What were the issues?
1. Whether the assessment orders dated 28.09.2021, rejecting the claim for deduction under Section 80P, were passed without properly considering the Supreme Court judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut and Others. Assessee's contentions: The petitioner argued that the assessing officer failed to properly consider the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut and Others, despite the judgment being delivered before the assessment orders were passed. The petitioner relied on this Supreme Court judgment to support its claim for deduction under Section 80P. Revenue's contentions: 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. Exts.P1, P8 & P15 orders of assessment were issued against the petitioner on 28.09.2021. In the aforesaid assessment orders, 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.
While assailing the assessment order before the 1 st respondent, 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 properly considered by the assessing officer, though the assessment
WP(C) NO. 199 OF 2022 3 order was rendered subsequent to the Supreme Court Judgment.
Since petitioner has already preferred appeals as Exts.P3, P10 and P17 for the assessment years 2013-2014, 2014-2015 & 2015-2016 respectively, and the same are pending consideration before the 1 st respondent, I deem it fit that this writ petition be disposed of directing the Appellate Authority to consider the appeals in a time bound manner.
Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1 st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P3, P10 and P17 appeals, as expeditiously as possible.
Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitioner, pursuant to Exts.P1, P8 & P15 assessment orders. The writ petition is disposed of. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE AMV/05/01/2022
WP(C) NO. 199 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 →- 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
- M/S Dc Security Services vs. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
