THE KARAKURISSI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. vs. THE ADDITIONAL / JOINT / DEPUTY /ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX / INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/16182/2022HC KeralaKLHC01032482202219 May 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, while acknowledging the pendency of the appeal filed by the petitioner (Ext.P2) before the appellate authority (2nd respondent), deemed it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the appellate authority to consider the appeal expeditiously. The court directed the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Furthermore, the court ordered that no coercive steps would be initiated pursuant to the assessment order (Ext.P1) until the disposal of the appeal. The High 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 Karakurissi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., is a Primary Agricultural Credit Society. The Assessing Officer passed an assessment order on March 26, 2022, rejecting 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 Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner filed an appeal against this assessment order before the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The petitioner contended that the Supreme Court judgment 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, despite the assessment order being passed after this judgment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessing officer erred in rejecting the petitioner's claim for deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by failing to consider the ingredients of a Primary Agricultural Credit Society as contemplated under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1969? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was erroneous as it failed to consider the binding Supreme Court judgment in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calicut and Others [2021 (1) KLT 485]. This judgment, rendered prior to the assessment order, was crucial for determining the eligibility for deduction under Section 80P. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue in response to the petitioner's arguments or the assessment order.

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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 29TH VAISAKHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 16182 OF 2022 PETITIONER: THE KARAKURISSI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. P 1025, KARAKURISSI, PALAKKAD, 678 595, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, A. JAYASREE, AGED 48, D/O. A. ANIYAN MENON. BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ADDITIONAL / JOINT / DEPUTY /ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX / INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL E- ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI 110 001. 2 NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI 110 001, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER. ADV.JOSE JOSEPH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO.16182 of 2022 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J …......….................................. W.P.(C) No.16182 of 2022 ….................................. Dated this the 19th day of May, 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 26.03.2022. 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 2 nd 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 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.P2 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.

4.

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2 nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

5.

Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order. The writ petition is disposed of. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AMV/19/05//2022

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16182/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2013-14. Exhibit P2 COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL TRUE COPY

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →