Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘PANAJI’ BENCH, PANAJI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI
॥ आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण, पणजी न्यायपीठ, पणजी में ॥ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘PANAJI’ BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Virtual Hearing from Pune) आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No. 038/PAN/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Hind Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd., 131, Hindwadi, Belgaum, Karnataka-590011 PAN: AACAT4514B . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Belgaum . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee by : Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 07/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 01/09/2023 आदेश / ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; Against the impugned DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1048023500(1) dt. 15/12/2022 passed u/s 250 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereafter] by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’ hereafter] the present appeal is instituted u/s 253(1) of the Act for assessment year 2017-18 [‘AY’ hereinafter].
Concisely stated facts born out of case records are; 2.1 The appellant assessee is a co-operative housing society has e-filed its return of income [‘ITR’ hereinafter] on 31/03/2019 declaring total income of NIL after claiming a deduction u/s 80P of chapter VI-A of the Act with sum of ₹33,88,761/-.
ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 6
Hind Co-op. Housing Society Vs ITO ITA No.038/PAN/2023 AY:2017-18
2.2 The ITR of the assessee society was subjected to scrutiny to verify the admissibility of deduction claimed u/c VI-A of the Act and the resultant assessment proceedings came to culmination u/s 143(3) of the Act by denying entire deduction claimed u/c VI-A for the bullet reason that, interest income earned by the appellant is ineligible for deduction as it was attributable (i) interest from Belgaum District Credit Co-op. Bank and (ii) interest from national bank.
2.3 The denial of deduction was in the first stance assailed before the Ld. NFAC, who came to dismiss the appeal of the assessee confirming the findings of his tax authority below.
2.4 Aggrieved assessee challenged the impugned order in the present appeal alleging that both the tax authorities erred in law and facts in disallowing the deduction u/s 80P in-spite the issue has been adjudicated by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2016-17 in ITA No. 239/PAN/2019 and further in case of ‘The Ugar Sugar Works & Dr Shirgaonkar Shaikshanki Trust Nokar Co-op. Credit Society Vs ITO’ MA No. 02/PAN/2021 r.w. ITA No. 84/PAN/2018.
At the virtual hearing, Ld. AR reiterated appellant’s version of submission as were laid before tax authorities below and adverting to page no 1/21 of paper book vehemently submitted that, out of the total
ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 6
Hind Co-op. Housing Society Vs ITO ITA No.038/PAN/2023 AY:2017-18
receipt an amount of ₹33,88,761/- represents the interest earned from the co-operative banks which are registered co-operative credit societies and no portion of interest is earned from nationalised bank. In the facts and circumstances, the assessee is entitled to 100% deduction of u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Per Contra, the Ld. DR could hardly controvert the factual position and judicial precedents relied upon by the appellant, however strongly relied on the order of tax authorities below.
Heard rival common contentions; and subject to provision of rule 18 of ITAT-Rules, 1963 perused material placed on record, case laws relied upon by both the rival parties and considered the facts in light of settled legal position which are forewarned to parties present.
The solitary issue in the present appeal hinges around allowability of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. On perusal of provisions of section 80P(2)(d), it is clear that income derived by a cooperative society from its investment held with other cooperative societies shall be deductible u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act from the total income of a cooperative society. Therefore, by application of stricter interpretation, the chief determinant factor entitling a claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) in the hand of assessee society is that, interest income should have been earned by it from any cooperative society registered under the provisions of law, irrespective of nomenclature with which such payer society is known for.
ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 6
Hind Co-op. Housing Society Vs ITO ITA No.038/PAN/2023 AY:2017-18
In the present case, the reasoning given by the lower tax authorities in denying the claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act is that interest was received from cooperative bank, however this reasoning has no legs to stand as a cooperative bank is principally a cooperative society and holds a banking license to operate on a larger scale under the guidelines of RBI. This issue was came to consider by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in ‘CIT Vs Totagars Cooperative Sale Society’, finds reported in 392 ITR 74 wherein their lordships referring to the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Totgars Co-operative Sales Society Ltd. (supra) held that the ratio of decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case (supra) not to be applied in respect of interest income on investment as same falls u/s 80P(2)(d) and not u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. We further note that, the co-ordinate bench in ‘Sant Motiram Maharaj Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd. vs. ITO’, reported in 120 taxmann.com 10, after making reference to the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Cooperative Sales Society Ltd. (supra) and having noticed the divergent views of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of ‘Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-op. Ltd. Vs ITO’, 55 taxmann.com 447 and decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in ‘Mantola Cooperative Thrift Credit Society Ltd. Vs CIT’, reported at 50 taxmann.com 278, the decision rendered in ‘Mantola Cooperative Thrift Credit Society Ltd. (supra) had not been preferred to ratio laid in ‘Tumkur
ITAT-Panaji Page 4 of 6
Hind Co-op. Housing Society Vs ITO ITA No.038/PAN/2023 AY:2017-18
Merchants Souharda Credit Co-op. Ltd. (supra), the relevant observation of the co-ordinate bench are placed as under; “9. The Pune Benches of the Tribunal in Sureshdada Jain Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit Vs. The Pr.CIT (ITA No.713/PUN/2016, dated 9-4- 2019) decided the question of availability of deduction u/s 80P on interest income by noticing that the Pune Bench in an earlier case of Shri Laxmi Narayan Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit Vs. ITO (ITA No.604/PN/2014, dated 19-8-2015) has allowed similar deduction. In the said case, the Tribunal discussed the contrary views expressed by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. Vs. ITO (2015) 230 Taxman 309 (Kar.) allowing deduction u/s. 80P on interest income and that of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Mantola Cooperative Thrift Credit Society Ltd. Vs. CIT (2014) 110 DTR 89 (Delhi) not allowing deduction u/s.80P on interest income earned from banks. Both the Hon'ble High Courts took into consideration the ratio laid down in the case of Totgar's Cooperative Sale Society Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 283 (SC). There being no direct judgment from the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court on the point, the Tribunal in Shri Laxmi Narayan Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit (supra) preferred to go with the view in favour of the assessee by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. (supra). 10. Insofar as the reliance of the ld. DR on the case of Pr. CIT and Another Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sales Society (2017) 395 ITR 611 (Kar.) is concerned, we find that the issue in that case was the eligibility of deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act on interest earned by the assessee cooperative society on investments made in co-operative banks. In that case, the assessee was engaged in the activity of marketing agricultural produce by its members; accepting deposits from its members and providing credit facility to its members; running stores, rice mills, live stocks, van section, medical shops, lodging, plying and hiring of goods and carriage etc. It was in that background of the facts that the Hon'ble High Court held that the assessee could not claim deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act. When we consider the impact of this decision, it turns out that the same is not
ITAT-Panaji Page 5 of 6
Hind Co-op. Housing Society Vs ITO ITA No.038/PAN/2023 AY:2017-18
germane to case under consideration in view of the position that the claim of the instant assessee is directly about the eligibility of deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act and not u/s.80P(2)(d). Moreover, so many decisions relied on by the ld. AR amply go to prove that the view taken by the AO, cannot by any standard, be construed as not a possible view. We, therefore, hold that the ld. Pr. CIT was not justified in exercising the revisional power anent to interest income of Rs.22,34,270/- earned on investments made with co-operative banks.” (Emphasis supplied)
Maintaining same parity we adopt equi reasoning and hold that, the interest earned by the appellant society is from co-operative banks namely BDCC, Saraswat Co-op. Bank, Tukaram Co-op. Bank and Cosmos Co-op. Bank, and as these being registered as co-operative society under respective state laws, the entire interest qualifies for deductions u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Consequently the views adopted by the tax authorities below are not in conformity with legal position and binding judicial precedents, hence deserves to be vacated. Resultantly, we set-aside the impugned order and reverse the disallowance.
In result, the appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, order pronounced in open court on this Friday 01st day of September, 2023.
-S/d- -S/d- SATBEER SINGH GODARA G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / PUNE ; ददनाांक / Dated : 01st day of September, 2023. आदेश की प्रनिनलनप अग्रेनषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.अपीलाथी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr.CIT, -Concerned 4. The NFAC, Delhi, New Delhi 5. DR, ITAT, Panaji Bench, Panaji 6. गार्डफ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / By Order Ashwini वररष्ठ दनजी सदिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय न्यायादधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
ITAT-Panaji Page 6 of 6