THE KOZHIKODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 9TH BHADRA, 1943 ITA NO. 59 OF 2018 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 233/Coch/2017 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH, ERNAKULAM DATED 1.12.2017 APPELLANT/Appellant/Assessee: THE KOZHIKODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. HEAD OFFICE, KALLAI ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673 002. BY ADVS. S.ARUN RAJ C.T.SUJA RESPONDENT/Respondent/Revenue: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673 001. OTHER PRESENT: SC CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.08.2021, ALONG WITH ITA.24/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ITA Nos.59 of 2018 & 24 of 2019 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 9TH BHADRA, 1943 ITA NO. 24 OF 2019 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 234/2017 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/Appellant/Assessee: THE KOZHIKODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE, KALLAI ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673 002. BY ADVS. S.ARUN RAJ SMT.C.T.SUJA RESPONDENT/Respondent/Revenue: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673 001. OTHER PRESENT: SC CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.08.2021, ALONG WITH ITA.59/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ITA Nos.59 of 2018 & 24 of 2019 3

JUDGMENT ITA Nos.59 of 2018 and 24 of 2019 S.V.Bhatti, J. Kozhikode District Co-operative Bank Ltd./assessee is the appellant. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kozhikode/Revenue is the respondent. 2. The appeals are filed aggrieved by the following orders. Sl. No. Assessment year Date

of Assessment Order Appeal before CIT and date of disposal Appeal before ITAT and date of order IT Appeal in High Court 1 2010-2011 31.3.2014 Appeal Nos.280/R1/CIT/CLT/2014- 2015 & 281/R1/CIT/CLT/2014-2015 ITA No. 233/Coch/2017 ITA No.59 of 2018 1 2011-2012 31.3.2014 Appeal Nos.280/R1/CIT/CLT/2014- 2015 & 281/R1/CIT/CLT/2014-2015 ITA No. 234/Coch/2017 dated 1/12/2017 ITA No.24 of 2019 3. The Tribunal by relying on the principles laid down by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v Lord Krishna Bank Ltd.1 dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. The operative portion of the order of the Tribunal reads as follows: "We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Cochin Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 in ITA Nos.168 & 1 (2011) 339 ITR 606 Ker.

ITA Nos.59 of 2018 & 24 of 2019 4 169/Coch/2015 vide order dated 19.11.2015 had decided an identical issue against the assessee. The co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal had followed the judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v Lord Krishna Bank Ltd. (supra). The relevant findings of the ITAT, Cochin Bench in assessee's own case for the A.Ys. 2008-09 and 2009-10 reads as follows: "Going by the ordinary meaning of rural branch, we feel only branches of the bank located in rural areas are covered. When the legislature adopts population as the basis for classification of rural branches, that too, with reference to the last census report, we feel the basic unit as available for identification of rural area in the census report can be legitimately adopted. So much so, we feel the above meaning of the rural area contained in the census report were in revenue village is treated as unit of rural area, can be rightly adopted. So much so, 'place' referred to in the above definition clause for the purpose of identifying the branch of bank as a rural branch with reference to its location is the revenue village." In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v Lord Krishna Bank Ltd. (supra) and the ITAT order in assessee's own case for AY 2008-09 and 2009-10, we hold that the CIT(A) is justified in confirming the Assessing Officer's action in restricting the claim of deduction u/s. 36(1)(viia) of the Act for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively. It is ordered accordingly." The principle applicable to the controversy between the parties is applied by the Tribunal, no ground for interference is made out. The Income Tax Appeals stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

Sd/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE Sd/- VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE css/

ITA Nos.59 of 2018 & 24 of 2019 5 APPENDIX OF ITA 24/2019 PETITIONER ANNEXURE ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.3.2014 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR THE AY 2011-12. ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.2.2017 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), KOCHI FOR THE AY 2011-12. ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 1.12.2017 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BRANCH, COCHIN FOR THE AY 2011-12.

ITA Nos.59 of 2018 & 24 of 2019 6 APPENDIX OF ITA 59/2018 PETITIONER ANNEXURE ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.3.2014 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR THE AY 2010-11 ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.2.2017 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS),KOCHI FOR THE AY 2010-11. ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 1.12.2017 PASSED BY THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH COCHIN FOR THE AY 2010- 11