The ITO, Wd-1, Kollam, Kollam V. M/s.Chathannoor Service Co-op Bank Ltd, Kollam

ITA 145/COCH/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4587 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 21-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A S BINDHU
• Keywords: Business income; Question of law; Competent authority; Set aside
• Section: 80P

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJAR I, AM & SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JM ITA NO. 14 5 /COCH/201 9 : ASST.YEAR 201 4 - 201 5 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 KOLLAM . VS. M/S. CHATHANNOOR SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. CHATHANNOOR KOLLAM 6981 572. PAN : AAAAC1371K . (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT.A.S.BINDHU, SR.DR RESPONDENT BY : --- NONE --- (WRITTEN SUBMISSION DATED 13.05.2019) DATE OF HEARING : 16 .05.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17 .05.2019 O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, JM TH IS APPEAL AT THE INSTANCE OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST CIT(A) S ORDER DATED18.12.2018 . THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2014 - 2015. 2. TWO ISSUES ARE RAISED IN THESE APPEALS (I) WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT; (II) WHETHER THE INTEREST INCOME RECEIVED ON INVESTMENTS CAN BE TREATED AS INCOME FROM BUSINESS AND GRANTED DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS FOLLOWS: THE ASSES SEE IN THIS CASE IS A REGISTERED AS CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES UNDER THE KERALA STATE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, ITA NO. 145 / COCH /201 9. M/S. CHATHANNOOR SCB LTD. 2 1969. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED IN THE ASSESSEE S CASE BY DENYING DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DENYING T HE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT, TREATED THE ASSESSEE AS A CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND NOT A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. FURTHER THE INTEREST RECEIVED FROM THE INVESTMENTS WERE DENIED DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT BY TREATING THE SAME AS INCOME FROM `O THER SOURCES. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THE CIT(A) BY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHIRAKKAL SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. (384 ITR 490) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT. AS REGARDS INTEREST RECEIVED ON INVESTMENTS, THE CIT(A) HELD THAT THE SAME SHOULD BE ASSESSED AS `INCOME FROM BUSINESS SINCE THESE INVESTMENTS WERE MADE IN THE COURSE OF BUS INESS OF THE ASSESSEE . IT WAS CONCLUDED BY THE CIT(A) THAT SUCH INTEREST INCOME WAS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT. IN HOLDING SO, THE LEARNED CIT(A) RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF KIZHATHADIYOOR SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED IN ITA NO.525/COCH/2014 (ORDER DATED 20.07.2016). 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A), THE DEPARTME NT HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THIS APPEAL READ AS FOLLOWS: 1. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), TRIVANDRUM ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT 'THE APPELLANT IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION ITA NO. 145 / COCH /201 9. M/S. CHATHANNOOR SCB LTD. 3 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT ON THE BUSINESS INCOME INCLUDING THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED ON THE DEPOSITS WITH THE OTHER BANKS AND THE TREASURY. 2. THE PRESENT APPEAL INVOLVES SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ON THE ISSUE OF DEDUCTION U/ S 80P OF THE ACT: (I) THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE NOTICED THAT THE RESPONDENT IS ESSENTIALLY, A CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND NOT MERELY A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY AND HENCE THE ALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/ S 80 P TO THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE WHILE COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME WAS IRREGULAR IN NATURE AND ALSO AGAINST LAW. (II) THE CASE OF M J S CHIRAKKAL SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD ON WHICH T HE LD. CIT(A) RELIED UPON IS CONTESTED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THE ISSUE HAS BEEN REFERRED TO A FULL BE NCH BY THE HON 'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, THE DECISION OF WHICH IS STILL AWAITED. (III) LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE JUD GEMENT OF HON 'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CITIZEN CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 9(1), HYDERABAD DATED 08.08.2017 REPORTED IN 397 ITR L(SC), WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IF A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY IS VIOLATING THE PRINCIPLE OF MUTUALITY IN THE GRAB OF PERSONS WHO ACTUALLY ARE NOT REAL MEMBERS AND INDULGING IN BANKING BUSINESS PER SE THAT IT CANNOT CLAIM THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I). (IV) THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING CASE LAWS: (A) 203 ITR 1027 (SC) IN THE CASE OF SABARGANTHA ZILLA KHARID VECHAR SANGH LTD. (B) 363 ITR 68 (KERALA) IN THE CASE OF PERUNTHALMANNA SERVICE CORPORATIVE BANK. (C) 234 ITR 201 (KERALA) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS KERALA STATE CO - OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATIO N ITA NO. 145 / COCH /201 9. M/S. CHATHANNOOR SCB LTD. 4 3. THE PRESENT APPEAL INVOLVES SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ON THE ISSUE OF ELIGIBILITY OF INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY THE APPELLANT FROM OTHER BANKS AND TREASURY, AS WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS CORR ECT: (I) IN NOT DULY CONSIDERING THAT THE INTEREST INCOME RECEIVED FROM DEPOSITS MADE WITH BANKS CANNOT BE ATTRIBUTABLE AS PROFIT AND GAINS FROM OUT OF PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS U/S 80P(A)(I)? (II) IN NOT DULY CONSIDERING THAT KOLLAM DI STRICT COOPERATIVE BANK LTD IS APEX BANK AND NOT CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY AND CANNOT BE EQUATED WITH PACS OR PCARDB U/S 80P(4) R W S 80P? (III) IN NOT DULY CONSIDERING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INVESTED SURPLUS FUNDS LIKE AN ORDINARY INVESTOR AND IT HAS TO BE TAXED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES? (IV) IN NOT DULY CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF THE APEX COURT IN 322 ITR 283 IN THE CASE OF M/S TOTGARS CO - O PERATIVE SALES SOCIETY. 4. FOR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE ADVANCED AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), T HIRUVANANTHAPURAM ON THE ABOVE POINTS MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER RE STORED . 6. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED ON THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEAL . FURTHER, THE LEARNED DR PLACED RELIANCE ON THE LATEST JUDGMENT OF THE LARGER BENCH OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF THE MAVILAYI SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. V. CIT [ITA NO.97/2016 ORDER DATED 19 TH MARCH, 2019] . NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ITA NO. 145 / COCH /201 9. M/S. CHATHANNOOR SCB LTD. 5 ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LARGER BENCH OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF THE MAVILAYI SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. (SUPRA) HELD THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO CONDUCT AN INQUIRY INTO THE FACTUAL SITUATION AS TO THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY TO DETERMINE THE ELIGIBILITY OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT. IT WAS HELD BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT BOUND BY THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF KERALA CO - OPERATIV E SOCIETY CLASSIFYING THE ASSESSEE - SOCIETY AS A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HELD THAT EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR IS SEPARATE AND ELIGIBILITY SHALL BE VERIFIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EACH OF THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. THE FINDING OF THE LARGER B ENCH OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT READS AS FOLLOWS: - 33. IN VIEW OF THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE APEX COURT IN CITIZEN CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY [397 ITR 1] IT CANNOT BE CONTENDED THAT, WHILE CONSIDERING THE CLAIM MADE BY AN ASSESSEE SOCIETY FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SEC TION 80P OF THE IT ACT, AFTER THE INTRODUCTION OF SUB - SECTION (4) THEREOF, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO EXTEND THE BENEFITS AVAILABLE, MERELY LOOKING AT THE CLASS OF THE SOCIETY AS PER THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION ISSUED UNDER THE CENTRAL OR STATE CO - OP ERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT AND THE RULES MADE THEREUNDER. ON SUCH A CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P OF THE IT ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO CONDUCT AN ENQUIRY INTO THE FACTUAL SITUATION AS TO THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY AND ARRIVE AT A CONC LUSION WHETHER BENEFITS CAN BE ITA NO. 145 / COCH /201 9. M/S. CHATHANNOOR SCB LTD. 6 EXTENDED OR NOT IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS UNDER SUB - SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P. 33. IN CHIRAKKAL [384 ITR 490] THE DIVISION BENCH HELD THAT THE APPELLANT SOCIETIES HAVING BEEN CLASSIFIED AS PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETIES BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER THE KCS ACT, IT HAS NECESSARILY TO BE HELD THAT THE PRINCIPAL OBJECT OF SUCH SOCIETIES IS TO UNDERTAKE AGRICULTURAL CREDIT ACTIVITIES AND TO PROVIDE LOANS AND ADVANCES FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES, THE RATE OF INTERE ST ON SUCH LOANS AND ADVANCES TO BE AT THE RATE TO BE FIXED BY THE REGISTRAR OF CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES UNDER THE KCS ACT AND HAVING ITS AREA OF OPERATION CONFINED TO A VILLAGE, PANCHAYAT OR A MUNICIPALITY AND AS SUCH, THEY ARE ENTITLED FOR THE BENEFIT OF S UB - SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P OF THE IT ACT TO EASE THEMSELVES OUT FROM THE COVERAGE OF SECTION 80P AND THAT, THE AUTHORITIES UNDER THE IT ACT CANNOT PROBE INTO ANY ISSUES OR SUCH MATTERS RELATING TO SUCH SOCIETIES AND THAT, PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOC IETIES REGISTERED AS SUCH UNDER THE KCS ACT AND CLASSIFIED SO, UNDER THE ACT, INCLUDING THE APPELLANTS ARE ENTITLED TO SUCH EXEMPTION. 34. IN CHIRAKKAL [384 ITR 490] THE DIVISION BENCH EXPRESSED A DIVERGENT OPINION, WITHOUT NOTICING THE LAW LAID DOWN IN ANTONY PATTUKULANGARA [2012 (3) KHC 726] AND PERINTHALMANNA [363 ITR 268]. MOREOVER, THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE DIVISION BENCH IN CHIRAKKAL [384 ITR 490] IS NOT GOOD LAW, SINCE, IN VIEW OF THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE APEX COURT IN CITIZEN CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY [ 397 ITR 1], ON A CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, BY REASON OF SUB - SECTION (4) THEREOF, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO CONDUCT AN ENQUIRY INTO THE FACTUAL SITUATION AS TO THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY AND ARRIVE AT A CONC LUSION WHETHER BENEFITS CAN BE EXTENDED OR NOT IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS UNDER SUB - SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P OF THE IT ACT. IN VIEW OF THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE APEX COURT IN CITIZEN CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY [397 ITR 1] THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE DIVISION B ENCH PERINTHALMANNA [363 ITR 268] HAS TO BE AFFIRMED AND WE DO SO. 35. IN VIEW OF THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE APEX COURT IN ACE MULTI AXES SYSTEMS CASE (SUPRA), SINCE EACH ASSESSMENT ITA NO. 145 / COCH /201 9. M/S. CHATHANNOOR SCB LTD. 7 YEAR IS A SEPARATE UNIT, THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE IS IN NO MANNER DEFEATED BY NOT ALLOWING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P OF THE IT ACT, BY REASON OF SUB - SECTION (4) THEREOF, IF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY CEASES TO BE THE SPECIFIED CLASS OF SOCIETIES FOR WHICH THE DEDUCTION IS PROVIDED, EVEN IF IT WAS ELIGIBLE IN THE INITIAL YEA RS. 7.1 IN VIEW OF THE DICTUM LAID DOWN BY THE FULL BENCH OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT, THE ISSUE OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) IS RESTORED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL EXAMINE THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE AND DETERMINE WHETHER TH EIR ACTIVITIES ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ACTIVITIES OF A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY FUNCTIONING UNDER THE KERALA CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1969 AND GRANT DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2) IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 8. AS REGARDS THE INTEREST ON THE INVESTMENTS WITH CO - OPER ATIVE BANKS AND OTHER BANKS, THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF KIZHATHADIYOOR SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED (SUPRA) HELD THAT INTEREST INCOME EARNED FROM INVESTMENTS WITH TREASURIES AND BANKS IS PART OF B ANKING ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE , AND THEREFORE, THE SAID INTEREST INCOME WAS ELIGIBLE TO BE ASSESSED AS `INCOME FROM BUSINESS INSTEAD OF `INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. HOWEVER, AS REGARDS THE GRANT OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT ON SUCH INTEREST INCOME, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL FOLLOW THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE LARGER BENCH OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF THE MAVILAYI SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. V. CIT [ITA NO.97/2016 ORDER DATED 19 TH MARCH, 2019] AND EXAMINE THE ITA NO. 145 / COCH /201 9. M/S. CHATHANNOOR SCB LTD. 8 ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE - SOCIETY BEFORE GRANT OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 9 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 17 TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 . SD/ - SD/ - ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ( GEORGE GEORGE K. ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER COCHIN ; DATED : 17 TH MAY, 2019 . DEVDAS* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, COCHIN 1. THE APPELLANT S 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE PR.CIT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. DR, ITAT, COCHIN 6 . GUARD FILE.