THE VALAPPAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. F. 207 vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Kerala did not decide the merits of the case. Instead, it noted that the petitioner had already preferred an appeal (Ext.P3) before the first respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)), which was pending consideration. 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 first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 expeditiously. 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 issue of whether the assessing officer erred in rejecting the Section 80P deduction was expressly left undecided by the High Court.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, The Valappad Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, a Primary Agricultural Credit Society, received an assessment order dated 08.03.2021. 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 Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The petitioner filed an appeal against this assessment order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the first respondent. 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], which was rendered prior to the assessment order, was not considered by the assessing officer.
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 Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969? Assessee's Contention: 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 [2021 (1) KLT 485] when passing the assessment order, despite the judgment being delivered prior to the assessment. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding this issue.
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 08.03.2021. 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 Kerala 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 considered by the assessing officer though the assessment
WP(C) NO. 25016 OF 2021 3 order was rendered subsequent to the Supreme Court Judgment.
Since the petitioner has already preferred an appeal as Ext.P3 and the same is 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 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.P3, as expeditiously as possible.
Till the disposal of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 assessment order. The writ petition is disposed of as above. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE AMV/12/11//2021
WP(C) NO. 25016 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 →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- J.M.Swamy vs. Government Of INDIAKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
