Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCHE : PANAJI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCHE : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.265/PAN/2019 Assessment Year 2016-2017 Shri Sai Credit Souhard The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Niyamit, Shah vs., Complex, Dr. Prabhakar Ward -1 Nipani Kore Nagar, Chikodi-591201 PAN AAKAS5410M PIN – 591 237 (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.18/PAN/2020 Assessment Year 2016-2017 Shri Veerrani Mallamma The Income Tax Officer, Urban Credit Souharda vs., Sahakri Ltd., No.1, At Post : Ward -1(5), Belgaum Belawadi – 591 104, Tal Bailhongal Dis:Belgaum. District Karnataka Karnataka (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessees : Shri Veeranna M Murgod For Revenue : Shri N. Shrikant Date of Hearing : 17.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 21.11.2022
2 ITA.No.265/Pan/2019 & ITA.No.18/Pan/2020 Shri Sai Credit Souharda SahakariNiyamit, Chikodi & Shri Veerrani Mallamma Urban Credit Souharda Sahakari Ltd., Belgavi. ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M.
These twin assessees’ as many appeals ITA.No.205/Pan/2019 and ITA.No.18/PAN/2020, both for assessment year 2016-17, arise against the CIT(A)’s Belgaum’s separate orders dated 19.07.2019 and 11.12.2019, passed in Case No.CIT(A)/BGM/10368/2018-19 and CIT(A)/BGM/10190/2018-19; respectively, in proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act").
Heard the assessees as well as the department. Case files perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing that these assessee’s have raised their identical sole substantive grievance challenging correctness of both lower authority’s action disallowing section 80P deduction claims of Rs.8,68,573/- and Rs.26,70,100/- respectively; for the sole reason that Saouhard credit co-operative society is not a cooperative society within the meaning of section 2(19) of the Act.
3 ITA.No.265/Pan/2019 & ITA.No.18/Pan/2020 Shri Sai Credit Souharda SahakariNiyamit, Chikodi & Shri Veerrani Mallamma Urban Credit Souharda Sahakari Ltd., Belgavi. 4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to rival pleadings against and in respect of the impugned identical disallowance. Learned DR vehemently argued that both the lower authorities have rightly rejected the assessee’s impugned deduction claims u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) since they are registered societies under the Karnataka Souhardha Sahakari Act, 1997 only than under the Karnataka Cooperative Society Law and, therefore, same deserves to be upheld.
4.1. All these Revenue’s arguments hardly deserve to be accepted. It emerges during the course of hearing that hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s decision in Government of India, Ministry of Finance vs., Karnataka State Souharda Federal Cooperative Ltd., [2022] 134 taxmann.com 170 (Kar.) has decided the very issue in assessee’s favour and against the department thereby holding that such cooperative societies registered under the Karnataka Souhadra Sahakari Act, 1997 very well come under the purview of a cooperative society defined u/s.2(19) of the Act. That being the case, I accept the instant twin assessee’s identical sole substantive
4 ITA.No.265/Pan/2019 & ITA.No.18/Pan/2020 Shri Sai Credit Souharda SahakariNiyamit, Chikodi & Shri Veerrani Mallamma Urban Credit Souharda Sahakari Ltd., Belgavi. ground in very terms. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.
No other ground or argument has been pressed during the course of hearing.
These twin assessee’s as many appeals are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in respective case files.
Sd/- [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 21st November, 2022 VBP/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The Ld. CIT(A) concerned. 4. The CIT concerned 5. D.R. ITAT, Panaji Bench, Panaji 6. Guard File. //By Order//
Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.