INCOME TAX OFFICER, BANGALORE vs. M/S.VASAVI CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1621/BANG/2016Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 June 2017AY 2012-136 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee is a credit co-operative society eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) and not a bank, making Section 80P(4) inapplicable. The CIT(A)'s order was upheld.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a credit co-operative society, claimed exemption under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). The Assessing Officer denied this exemption, considering the society a bank and thus ineligible under Section 80P(4). The CIT(A) allowed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether a credit co-operative society can be treated as a bank for the purpose of denying deduction under Section 80P(4) of the Income-tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P(2)(a)(i),Section 80P(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH ‘A’

Before: SHRI VIJAYPAL RAO & SHRI JASON P BOAZ

For Respondent: Smt. Swapna Das, JCIT

PER SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) -2, Bangalore dated 15/6/2016 for the Assessment Year 2012-13.

2.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are as under:-

2.1 The assessee, a credit co-operative society, filed its return of income for asst. year 2012-13 declaring income of Rs.3,23,495/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) and the case was subsequently taken up for scrutiny. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30/5/2015; wherein the income of the assessee was determined at Rs.92,94,440/-. This was in view of the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) denying the assessee claim for exemption u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) amounting to Rs.89,15,937/- as he was of the opinion that the assessee credit co- operative society is in fact a bank as per section 5(ccv) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and, therefore, as per the provision of sec. 80P(4) of the Act, the deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act was not allowable. On appeal, the ld CIT(A) vide the impugned order dated 15/6/2016 allowed the assessee’s appeal for grant of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act following the decisions of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Yashwanthpur Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. (ITA No.237/2012 dated 27/6/2014) and the case of Sri Biluru Gurubasava Pattina Sahakari Sangha Niyamitha, Bagalkot in dated 5/2/2014.

3.1 Revenue, being aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A)-2, Bangalore dated 15/6/2016, has preferred this appeal raising the following grounds:-

3.2.1 We have heard the rival contentions of the ld DR for Revenue and the ld AR for the assessee, and perused and carefully considered the material on record, including the judicial pronouncements cited.

We find that the ld CIT(A), in the impugned order, following the decisions of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the cases of Yashwanthpur Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. (ITA No.237/2012 dated 27/6/2014) and the case of Sri Biluru Gurubasav Pattina Sahakari Sangha Niyamitha, Bagalkot in dated 5/2/2014 allowed the assessee’s appeal holding as under that the assessee co-operative society cannot be treated as a bank and is eligible for the deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act.

3.2.2 Respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Yashwanthpur Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. (Supra) and the case of Sri Biluru Gurubasav Pattina Sahakari Sangha Niyamitha, Bagalkot (Supra), we hold that the assessee co- operative society is a credit co-operative society which is eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act and is not a bank, and, therefore, the provisions of sec. 80P(4) of the Act are not applicable. In this view of the matter, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order of the ld CIT(A) on this issue. Consequently, the grounds raised by Revenue, being devoid of merit, are dismissed.

4.

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for asst. year 2011-12 is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 7th June, 2017.

More judgments on Section 80P(2)(a)(i)

All 2,347 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P(2)(a)(i) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →