AYYANTHOLE PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED 471,KARIATTUKARA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), THRISSUR

ITA 193/COCH/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Ayyanthole Panchayath Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that confirmed the Assessing Officer's decision denying the claim for deduction under section 80P of the Income Tax Act. The primary contention was whether the appellant, a co-operative bank, qualified as a primary agricultural credit society, which is essential for availing deductions under section 80P(2)(a)(i). The Tribunal noted the appellant's failure to discharge the onus of proving its status as a primary agricultural credit society and remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for further examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 46907 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEENA LAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ALAN DEV
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Co-operative Credit Society
• Section: 80P

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member ITA No.193/Coch/2025 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 Ayyanthole Panchayath Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.No.471 Kariyattukara PO Thrissur – 680 611 PAN : AACAA3641G. v. The Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Thrissur. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Alan Dev, Advocate Respondent by : Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR Date of Hearing : 26.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 08.04.2025 O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre / Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short] dated 22.12.2023 for the assessment year 2012-2013. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a co-operative society duly registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The appellant is classified as a primary agricultural credit society. No regular return of income u/s.139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for the assessment year 2012-2013 was filed by the appellant. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer (“the AO”) issued a notice u/s.148 of the Act on 29th March, 2019 calling upon the appellant to file the return of income. In response to the notice u/s.148 of the Act, the appellant filed the return of income on 9th August, 2019 declaring ITA No.193/Coch/2025. Ayyanthole Panchayath SC.B Ltd. 2 Nil income after claiming deduction u/s.80P of the Act amounting to Rs.40,98,500. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the AO vide order dated 12th December, 2019 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act at a total income of Rs.40,98,500 denying the claim for deduction u/s.80P of the Act by observing that the appellant is a co-operative bank and therefore hit by the provisions of sub-section (4) of the section 80P of the Act and also holding that the appellant has not discharged the onus of proving it to be a primary agricultural co-operative credit society. 3. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order allowed standard deduction to sec.80P of the Act and confirmed the action of the AO in denying the claim for deduction u/s.80P of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before me in the present appeal. At the outset, there is a delay in filing the present appeal by 377 days. The appellant filed a condonation petition seeking condonation of delay on the ground that the appellant was not aware of the order passed by the CIT(A) u/s.250 of the Act. It had come to the knowledge, only after the receipt of the consequential order passed by the CIT(A) vide email dated 23rd January, 2024. Thus, he submitted that the appellant was not aware of the order passed by the CIT(A) till the passing of the consequential order to the CIT(A) order. Thus, it is submitted that the delay had occurred on account of factors which are beyond its control. In the absence of evidence to the contrary the averments made in the affidavit seeking condonation of delay cannot be ITA No.193/Coch/2025. Ayyanthole Panchayath SC.B Ltd. 3 rejected and therefore the delay of 377 days is condoned and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 5. I heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The only issue that arises for my consideration is whether the AO is justified in rejecting the claim of deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The AO as well as the CIT(A) had denied the claim for deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act for the failure of the assessee to discharge the onus of proving that it is a primary agricultural credit society. During the course of proceedings before the CIT(A), the appellant has filed certificate issued by the Reserve Bank of India in the year 1943 classifying the appellant society as a primary agricultural credit society. However, the CIT(A) on considering the said certificate held that since it is very old one, the appellant cannot be granted deduction u/s.80P of the Act. Therefore, in view of the settled position of law that in the absence of license to carry on the business of banking the appellant cannot be classified as a co-operative bank, I remit the matter back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication with a direction that the appellant shall adduce evidence to prove that the appellant is a primary agricultural credit society. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced on this 08th day of April, 2025. Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cochin; Dated : 08th April, 2025. Devadas G* ITA No.193/Coch/2025. Ayyanthole Panchayath SC.B Ltd. 4 Copy to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT, Cochin. 4. The DR, ITAT, Cochin. 5. Guard File. Asst.Registrar/ITAT, Cochin "