INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIJAYAPURA vs. M/S. SIDDASIRI PATTIN SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMIT, VIJAYAPURA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 748/BANG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 March 2019AY 2009-20105 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, following decisions of the Supreme Court and its own prior ruling, remanded the matter back to the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is to re-examine the issue after fresh inquiry, considering the assessee's submissions and a remand report from the AO.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order concerning the assessment year 2009-10. The primary issue was the assessee's eligibility for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) due to alleged non-adherence to the principle of mutuality.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee, a cooperative society, is entitled to deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) when it allegedly does not follow the principle of mutuality and is not registered under the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENGALURU BENCH B, BENGALURU

Before: SHRI. A. K. GARODIA

For Appellant: Shri. Sukesh Patil, CA
For Respondent: Ms. Kapila H, JCIT

PER LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

1.

The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the CIT (A), Belagavi, dt.18.12.2017, for the assessment year 2009-10.

ITA.748/Bang/2018 Page - 2

2.

The Revenue has raised the following grounds :

3. At the outset, it was submitted by the Ld. DR that the CIT (A) had not considered the binding decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Citizen Cooperative Society v. ACIT [397 ITR 1], wherein at para 24, it was held as under :

24) Undoubtedly, if one has to go by the aforesaid definition of ‘co-operative bank’, the appellant does not get covered thereby. It is also a matter of common knowledge that in order to do the business of a co-operative bank, it is imperative to have a ITA.748/Bang/2018 Page - 3 licence from the Reserve Bank of India, which the appellant does not possess. Not only this, as noticed above, the Reserve Bank of India has itself clarified that the business of the appellant does not amount to that of a co-operative bank. The appellant, therefore, would not come within the mischief of sub- section (4) of Section 80P.

It was the case of the Ld. DR that the assessee is involved into giving funds to the non-members. For that purposes, our attention was drawn to assessment order wherein the AO had examined the status of the assessee and came to the conclusion that the assessee is not entitled for deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) because the principle of mutuality is not followed.

4.

Per contra, the Ld. AR relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the matter of M/s. Udaya Souharda Credit Co operative Society Ltd [ITA No.2831/Bang/2017, dt.17.08.2018. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is not into banking business and therefore no licence is required from the RBI. Further it was submitted that the assessee is registered under the Karnataka Cooperative Societies’ Act, 1959, and therefore the assessee is entitled to deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act.

5.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We have reproduced hereinabove, para 24 of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Citizen Cooperative Society (supra), which is relevant here. In a recent order in the matter of M/s. Udaya Souharda Credit Co operative Society Ltd [ITA No.2831/Bang/2017, dt.17.08.2018], it was noted by the Tribunal that Karnataka State has notified Karnataka Co – ITA.748/Bang/2018 Page - 4 Operative Societies Act, 1959 as well as the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997 and both Acts are in force. Therefore, conversion from one into another is possible. Thereafter the Tribunal held that the deduction u/s.80P can only be applied to a cooperative society registered under the Karnataka Co- Operative Societies Act, 1959 and thereafter the matter was restored back to the AO for fresh decision after making necessary enquiry and investigation. In the present case, the facts are identical and one more plea was raised pertaining to mutuality.

6.

In view of the above, respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Citizen Cooperative Society (supra) and Udaya Souharda Cooperative Society (supra), we remand the appeal to the file of the CIT (A) to decide the issue afresh in the light of the observations made hereinabove. Needless to say the CIT (A) shall give opportunity of hearing to the assessee and shall also consider the submissions, if any made by the assessee in this regard and also seek a remand report from the AO, and thereafter decide the matter in accordance with law.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →