PERUVEMBA SAHAKARANA URBAN CREDIT SOCIETY,PRUVEMBA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, PALAKKAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 366/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin18 November 2024AY 2016-17Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the denial of deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) solely on the ground of providing credit facilities to nominal members is unjustified. This is based on the Supreme Court's decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a primary agricultural credit co-operative society, claimed deduction under Section 80P. The Assessing Officer denied this deduction, holding the assessee was not a primary agricultural co-operative society as it provided credit to nominal members.

What were the issues?

Whether a co-operative society is disentitled to deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) if it provides credit facilities to nominal members.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 29.10.2024Pronounced: 18.11.2024

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 26.02.2024 for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a primary agricultural credit co- operative society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The return of income for AY 2016-17 was filed on 10.03.2018 declaring Nil income after claiming deduction of Rs. 30,82,959/- u/s. 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Against the said return of income, assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer (AO) vide order dated 26.12.2018. While doing so the AO had denied exemption u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act by holding that the assessee is not a primary agricultural co-operative society, as it also provides credit facilities to nominal Peruvemba Sahakarana Urban Credit Society members who are classified as class B and class C members and placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2017] 397 ITR 1 (SC).

3.

Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO.

4.

Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The solitary issue that arises in both the appeals is where the lower authorities were justified in denying deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act solely on the ground that the assessee co-operative society also provided credit facilities to nominal members. The issue in the appeal is no more res integra as it is settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 431 ITR 1 (SC) after making a reference to its earlier judgement in the case of UP Cooperative Cane Unions’ Federation Ltd. 11 SCC 287 wherein it is held that the expression “member” includes nominal members under the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act and therefore it was held that denial of exemption u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act is unjustified solely on the ground that the assessee society also provides loans to the nominal members. In the light of the decision by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the AO is directed to allow the deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act as claimed by the assessee.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 80P

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →