KALADY GRAMA PANCHAYATH SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Kerala did not decide the merits of the appeal. Instead, it directed the appellate authority (the 2nd respondent, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre) to consider and pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's appeal (Ext.P2) expeditiously. The Court acknowledged that the appeal was pending. As an interim measure, 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 primary issue regarding the eligibility for deduction under Section 80P, based on the Mavilayi judgment, was left to be decided by the appellate authority. No specific finding was made on the interpretation of Section 80P or the definition of a Primary Agricultural Credit Society.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, M/s. Kalady Grama Panchayath Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., a Primary Agricultural Credit Society, challenged an assessment order dated August 22, 2019. The assessment order rejected the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P. The ground for rejection was the alleged lack of evidence demonstrating that the petitioner satisfied the ingredients of a Primary Agricultural Credit Society as defined under the Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner argued that the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut and Others [2021 (1) KLT 485] was applicable to its case. The petitioner had already filed an appeal against the assessment order, which was pending before the appellate authority.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the petitioner, a Primary Agricultural Credit Society, is entitled to deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, considering the ingredients of such a society as contemplated under the Co-operative Societies Act. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that the Supreme Court's judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut and Others [2021 (1) KLT 485] governs the factual situation and supports its claim for deduction under Section 80P. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through the assessment order, rejected the deduction on the ground that the petitioner failed to provide evidence to satisfy the ingredients of a Primary Agricultural Credit Society as contemplated under the Co-operative Societies Act. No specific arguments from the revenue are recorded in this judgment regarding the applicability of the Mavilayi judgment or other contentions.
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 22.08.2019. 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.
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] governs the factual situation arising in the case.
Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as Ext.P2
WP(C) NO. 26841 OF 2021 3 and the same is pending consideration before the 2 nd 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.
Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1 st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 appeal, 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. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS,
JUDGE AMV/29/11//2021
WP(C) NO. 26841 OF 2021 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 →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
