The ITO,Wd-4, Kottayam, Kottayam V. M/s.Sahyadri Co-op Credit Society Ltd, Kottayam

ITA 153/COCH/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2889 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 19-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A S BINDHU
• Assessee Lawyers: SHYJO JOSEPH
• Keywords: Business income
• Section: 56

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJAR I, AM & SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JM ITA NO. 152 /COCH/201 8 : ASST.YEAR 201 3 - 2014 ITA NO. 153 /COCH/201 8 : ASST.YEAR 2014 - 2015 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4 KOTTAYAM. VS. M/S. SAHYADRI CO - OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED AMALAJYOTHI BUILDING 1 ST FLOOR, CHEDRAL ROAD KANJIRAPPALLY KOTTAYAM. PAN : AAJAS5171N . (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT.A.S.BINDHU RESPONDENT BY : SRI. SHYJO JOSEPH DATE OF HEARING : 20 .08.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 .08.2018 O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, JM THESE APPEAL S AT THE INSTANCE OF THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDER S OF THE CIT(A) BOTH DAT ED 30.01.2018 . THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR S ARE 201 3 - 201 4 AND 2014 - 2015 . 2. TWO ISSUES ARE RAISED IN THESE APPEALS : ( I) WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S. 80P(2) OF THE I.T.ACT. ( II) WHETHER THE INTEREST INCOME, COMMISSION FROM GDCS AND PROCESSING FEE ARE INCOME FROM BUSINESS OR INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 3. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS FOLLOWS: ITA NO S . 152 - 153 / C /201 8. M/S. SAHYADRI CO - OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD . 2 THE ASSESSEE IS A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY, REGISTERED UNDER THE MULTISTATE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 2002. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2013 - 2014 AND 2014 - 2015, THE ASSESSMENTS WERE COMPLETED BY DISALLOWING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2) OF THE I.T.ACT. THE REASON FOR DENYING THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2) WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BANKING AND IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P(4) OF THE I.T.ACT, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO TREATED INTEREST INCOME RECEIVED ON BANK DEPOSITS, COMMISSION FROM GDCS AND DISCOUNT, PROCESSING FEE, ETC. AS `INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES, THEREBY DIS ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE I.T.ACT. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL S BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THE CIT(A), FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.340/COCH/2016 & CO. NO.26/COCH/2016 ORDER DATED 26 TH MAY, 2017 HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WA S ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S. 80P(2) OF THE I.T. ACT. THE CIT(A) ALSO H ELD THAT INTEREST EARNED ON BANK DEPOSIT, COMMISSION ON GDCS AND PROCESSING FEE ARE `INCOME FROM BUSINESS. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER S OF THE LD. C I T(A), THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL S BEFORE US. THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE GROUNDS RAISE D. THE L D. AR ON THE OTHER HAND, BY PLACING ON RECORD A COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO S . 152 - 153 / C /201 8. M/S. SAHYADRI CO - OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD . 3 ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.340/COCH/2016 AND CO NO.26/COCH/2016, SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE S IN QUESTION ARE SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE . 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT SIMILAR ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEALS CAME UP FOR ADJUDICATION FOR THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR, I.E. FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 2013 , IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE, WHE REIN THE TRIBUNAL HAD DECIDED BOTH THE ISSUE S IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVANT FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 2013, READS AS FOLLOWS: - 5. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS AND HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. CERTIFICATE DATED 16 - 03 - 2004 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF CENTRAL REGISTRAR OF CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE & COOPERATION OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CLEARLY STATES THAT ASS ESSEE IS A MULTI STATE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED U/S. 7 OF THE MULTI STATE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 2002. IT IS NOT DISPUTED THAT THE EARNINGS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WERE FROM CREDIT FACILITIES GIVEN BY IT TO ITS MEMBERS. SECTION 80P(1) OF THE AC T IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: 80P. (1) WHERE, IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE BEING A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY, THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME INCLUDES ANY INCOME REFERRED TO IN SUB - SECTION (2), THERE SHALL BE DEDUCTED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH AND SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF T HIS SECTION, THE SUMS SPECIFIED IN SUB - SECTION (2), IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. (2) THE SUMS REFERRED TO IN SUB - SECTION (1) SHALL BE THE FOLLOWING, NAMELY : (A) IN THE CASE OF A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN (I) CARRYING ON THE BUSIN ESS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS, OR (II) A COTTAGE INDUSTRY, OR (III) THE ITA NO S . 152 - 153 / C /201 8. M/S. SAHYADRI CO - OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD . 4 MARKETING OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE GROWN BY ITS MEMBERS, OR (IV) THE PURCHASE OF AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENTS, SEEDS, LIVESTOCK OR OTHER ARTICLES INTENDED FOR AGRICULTURE FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUPPLYING THEM TO ITS MEMBERS, OR (V) THE PROCESSING, WITHOUT THE AID OF POWER, OF THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE OF ITS MEMBERS, OR (VI) THE COLLECTIVE DISPOSAL OF THE LABOUR OF ITS MEMBERS, OR (VII) FISHING OR ALLIED ACTIVITIES, THAT IS TO SAY, THE CATCHING, CURING, PROCESSING, PRESERVING, STORING OR MARKETING OF FISH OR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT IN CONNECTION THEREWITH FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUPPLYING THEM TO ITS MEMBERS, THE WHOLE OF THE AMOUNT OF PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS ATTRIBUTABLE TO ANY ONE OR MORE OF SUCH ACTIVITIES : PROVIDED THAT IN THE CASE OF A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY FALLING UNDER SUB - CLAUSE (VI), OR SUB - CLAUSE (VII), THE RULES AND BYE - LAWS OF THE SOCIETY RESTRICT THE VOTING RIGHTS TO THE FOLLOWING CLASSES OF ITS MEMBERS, NAMELY: (1) THE INDIVIDUALS WHO CONTRIBUTE THEIR LABOUR OR, AS THE CASE MAY BE, CARRY ON THE FISHING OR ALLIED ACTIVITIES; (2) THE CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES WHICH PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE SOCIETY; (3) THE STATE GOVERNMENT; ( B) IN THE CASE OF A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY, BEING A PRIMARY SOCIETY ENGAGED IN SUPPLYING MILK, OILSEEDS, FRUITS OR VEGETABLES RAISED OR GROWN BY ITS MEMBERS TO (I) A FEDERAL CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY, BEING A SOCIETY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF SUPPLYING MILK, OI LSEEDS, FRUITS, OR VEGETABLES, AS THE CASE MAY BE; OR (II) THE GOVERNMENT OR A LOCAL AUTHORITY; OR (III) A GOVERNMENT COMPANY AS DEFINED IN SECTION 617 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 (1 OF 1956), OR A CORPORATION ESTABLISHED BY OR UNDER A CENTRAL, STATE OR PRO VINCIAL ACT (BEING A COMPANY OR CORPORATION ENGAGED IN SUPPLYING MILK, OILSEEDS, FRUITS OR VEGETABLES, AS THE CASE MAY BE, TO THE PUBLIC), THE WHOLE OF THE AMOUNT OF PROFITS AND GAINS OF SUCH BUSINESS; (C) IN THE CASE OF A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN A CTIVITIES OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFIED IN CLAUSE (A) OR CLAUSE (B) (EITHER INDEPENDENTLY OF, OR IN ADDITION TO, ALL OR ANY OF THE ACTIVITIES SO SPECIFIED), SO MUCH OF ITS PROFITS AND ITA NO S . 152 - 153 / C /201 8. M/S. SAHYADRI CO - OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD . 5 GAINS ATTRIBUTABLE TO SUCH ACTIVITIES AS DOES NOT EXCEED, (I) WHERE SUCH C O - OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS A CONSUMERS' CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY, ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND RUPEES; AND (II) IN ANY OTHER CASE, FIFTY THOUSAND RUPEES. EXPLANATION. IN THIS CLAUSE, 'CONSUMERS' CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY' MEANS A SOCIETY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CONSUMERS; (D) I N RESPECT OF ANY INCOME BY WAY OF INTEREST OR DIVIDENDS DERIVED BY THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM ITS INVESTMENTS WITH ANY OTHER CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY, THE WHOLE OF SUCH INCOME; (E) IN RESPECT OF ANY INCOME DERIVED BY THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM THE LETTIN G OF GODOWNS OR WAREHOUSES FOR STORAGE, PROCESSING OR FACILITATING THE MARKETING OF COMMODITIES, THE WHOLE OF SUCH INCOME; (F) IN THE CASE OF A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY, NOT BEING A HOUSING SOCIETY OR AN URBAN CONSUMERS' SOCIETY OR A SOCIETY CARRYING ON TRANSP ORT BUSINESS OR A SOCIETY ENGAGED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF ANY MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS WITH THE AID OF POWER, WHERE THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME DOES NOT EXCEED TWENTY THOUSAND RUPEES, THE AMOUNT OF ANY INCOME BY WAY OF INTEREST ON SECURITIES OR ANY INCOME FROM HO USE PROPERTY CHARGEABLE UNDER SECTION 22. EXPLANATION. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, AN 'URBAN CONSUMERS' CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY' MEANS A SOCIETY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CONSUMERS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL COMMI TTEE, NOTIFIED AREA COMMITTEE, TOWN AREA OR CANTONMENT. IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ABOVE THAT THE PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS OR PROFESSION ATTRIBUTABLE TO CARRYING ON A BUSINESS OF PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITY TO MEMBERS WILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S. 80 P(1) OF THE ACT. HENCE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR CLAIMING SUCH DEDUCTION. ONLY QUESTION THAT REMAINS IS WHETHER ASSESSEE COULD BE DENIED THIS CLAIM, ON ACCOUNT OF RESTRICTIONS PLACED BY SECTION 80P(4) OF THE ACT. SECTION 80P(4) IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: ( 4) THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY IN RELATION TO ANY COOPERATIVE BANK OTHER THAN A PRIMARY ITA NO S . 152 - 153 / C /201 8. M/S. SAHYADRI CO - OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD . 6 AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OR A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. EXPLANATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS SUB - SECTION, - (A) CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY SHALL HAVE THE MEANINGS RESPECTIVELY ASSIGNED TO THEM IN PART V OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949 (10 OF 1949); (B) PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK MEANS A SOCIETY HAVING ITS AREA OF OPERATION CONFINED TO A TALUK AND THE PRINCIPAL OBJECT OF WHICH IS TO PROVIDE FOR LONG - TERM CREDIT FOR AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES. HENCE THE QUESTION BOILS DOWN TO WHETHER ASSESSEE COULD BE CONSIDERED AS A COOPERATIVE BANK. NOTHING WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE REVENUE TO SHOW THAT RESERVE BANK OF INDIA DECLARED IT AS A CO - OPERATIVE BANK. NEITHER WAS THE ASSESSEE A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY NOR WAS IT A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SRI BILURU GURUBASAVA PATTINA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA, BAGALKOT, (2014) (369 ITR 86) HAS CLEARLY HELD THAT FOR A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY TO BE CONSIDERED AS A CO - OPERATIVE BANK, IT WAS NE CESSARY THAT RESERVE BANK OF INDIA SHOULD HAVE GIVEN SUCH A CLASSIFICATION TO THE SAID CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. A SIMILAR VIEW WAS TAKEN BY THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF JAFARI MOMIN VIKAS CO - OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.(2014) (362 ITR 331). IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT SECTION 80P(4) HAD NO APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD. APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS THUS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE, GRIEVANCE RAISED IS ON THE TREATMENT OF INTEREST, UNDER THE HEAD ITA NO S . 152 - 153 / C /201 8. M/S. SAHYADRI CO - OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD . 7 INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES INSTEAD OF INCOME FROM BUSINESS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHILE DOING THE ASSESSMENT, HAD CONSIDERED INTEREST EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE ON BANK DEPOSIT S UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. ASSESSEE HAD EARNED INTEREST OF RS.51,93,347/ - ON BANK DEPOSITS. SINCE THE ABOVE INCOME WAS TREATED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES, CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80P(1) OF THE ACT STOOD AUTOMATICALLY DENI ED. RELIANCE WAS PLACED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF TOTGARS CO - OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY VS.ITO (322 ITR 283). ASSESSEES APPEAL ON THIS ISSUE BEFORE THE CIT(A) DID NOT MEET WITH SUCCESS. 7. NOW BEFORE US, LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF TOTGARS CO - OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA) WAS NOT APPLICABLE SINCE IN THE SAID CASE THE ISSUE WAS TREATMENT OF INTEREST RECEIVED ON DEPOSITS CREATED FROM RETENTION OF SA LE PROCEEDS, NOT IMMEDIATELY REQUIRED FOR BUSINESS PURPOSE. AS PER THE LD. AR, IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITS ON WHICH INTEREST INCOME WAS EARNED WERE NOT FROM ANY SUCH RETENTION BUT WERE DEPOSITS FOR MEETING THE STATUTORY RESERVE REQUIREMENTS UNDER SECTION 64 OF THE MULTI STATE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 2002. THE LD. AR ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON BOARD CIRCULAR NO. 18/2015 IN F.1279/MISC./140/2015/ITJ DATED 02/11/2015. AS PER THE LD. AR BY VIRTUE OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE O F NAWANSHAHAR CENTRAL CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. (2007) 160 TAXMAN 48 THE INTEREST INCOME WOULD BE CONSIDERED ONLY UNDER THE HEAD OF BUSINESS. 8. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS AND HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IT HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED THAT INTEREST INCOME EARN ED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE FROM DEPOSITS PLACED BY IT IN BANKS. CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT SUCH INTEREST SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ONLY AS PART OF ITS BUSINESS INCOME SINCE THE DEPOSITS WERE PLACED ITA NO S . 152 - 153 / C /201 8. M/S. SAHYADRI CO - OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD . 8 FOR MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATUTORY RESERVES UNDER T HE MULTI STATE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 2002. NO DOUBT, THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF TOTGARS CO - OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY BANK LTD.(SUPRA) HAD HELD THAT INTEREST RECEIVED ON DEPOSITS CREATED OUT OF SALE PROCEEDS RECEIVED FROM THE MEMBERS NOT IMMED IATELY DISBURSED TO SUCH MEMBERS, WAS TO BE CONSIDERED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. HOWEVER, IN THE CASE BEFORE US, ADMITTEDLY, THE DEPOSITS WERE NOT OUT OF SALE PROCEEDS FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE ASSESSEE - SOCIETY. REVENUE HAS NOT REBUTTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT DEPOSITS ON WHICH INTEREST WAS EARNED WAS FOR MEETING INVESTMENT REQUIREMENT ON STATUTORY RESERVES UNDER THE MULTI STATE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 2002. CLEARLY, IT WAS OUT OF COMPULSIONS O F BUSINESS THAT THE DEPOSITS WERE PLACED BY THE AS IN THE BANKS. EARNING OF INTEREST THERE FROM, IN OUR OPINION, COULD ONLY BE TREATED AS INCOME FROM ITS BUSINESS. IT IS ALSO INTERESTING TO HAVE A LOOK AT CIRCULAR DATED 02/11/2015 (SUPRA) ISSUED BY THE CBD T WHICH IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: NEW DELHI, 2 ND NOVEMBER,2015 SUBJECT: INTEREST FROM NON - SLR SECURITIES OF BANKS REG IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE BOARD THAT IN THE CASE OF BANKS, FIELD OFFICERS ARE TAKING A VIEW THAT, EXPENSES RELATABLE TO INVESTMENT IN NON - SLR SECURITIES NEED TO BE DISALLOWED U/S. 57(I) OF THE ACT AS INTEREST ON NON - SLR SECURITIES IS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 2. CLAUSE (ID) OF SUB - SECTION(1) OF SECTION 56 OF THE ACT PROVIDES THAT INCOME BY WAY OF INTEREST ON SECURITIES SHALL BE CHARGEABLE TO INCOME - TAX UNDER THE HEAD PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSION. 3. THE MATTER HAS BEE N EXAMINED IN LIGHT OF THE ITA NO S . 152 - 153 / C /201 8. M/S. SAHYADRI CO - OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD . 9 JUDICIAL DECISIONS ON THIS ISSUE. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. NAWANSHAHAR CENTRAL CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. (2007) 160 TAXMANN 48 (SC), THE APEX COURT HELD THAT THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY A BANKING CONCERN ARE PART OF THE BUSINESS OF BANKIN G. THEREFORE, THE INCOME ARISING FROM SUCH INVESTMENTS IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE BUSINESS OF BANKING FALLING UNDER THE HEAD PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSION. 3.2 EVEN THOUGH THE ABOVEMENTIONED DECISION WAS IN THE CONTEXT OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETI ES/BANKS CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S.80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT, THE PRINCIPLE IS EQUALLY APPLICABLE TO ALL BANKS/COMMERCIAL BANKS, TO WHICH BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949 APPLIES. 4. IN THE LIGHT OF THE SUPREME COURTS DECISION IN THE MATTER, THE ISSUE IS WELL SE TTLED. ACCORDINGLY, THE BOARD HAS DECIDED THAT NO APPEALS MAY HENCEFORTH BE FILED ON THIS GROUND BY THE OFFICERS OF HE DEPARTMENT AND APPEALS ALREADY FILED, IF ANY, ON THIS GROUND BEFORE COURTS/TRIBUNALS MAY BE WITHDRAWN/NOT PRESSED UPON. THIS MAY BE BROUG HT TO THE NOTICE OF ALL CONCERNED. SD/ - (D S CHAUDHRY) CIT(A&J), CBDT, NEW DELHI PARA 3.2 OF THE ABOVE CIRCULAR CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF NAWANSHAHAR CENTRAL CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. (SUPRA) CAN BE APPLI ED TO A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY ALSO WHERE THERE IS A CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. CONSIDERING ALL THESE ASPECTS, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE INTEREST EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN TREATED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES BUT ONLY AS A PART OF ITS BUSINESS INCOME. CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 7. IN VIEW OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE, WHICH IS IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE UPHOLD THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A). IT IS ORDERE D ACCORDINGLY. ITA NO S . 152 - 153 / C /201 8. M/S. SAHYADRI CO - OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD . 10 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL S FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 29 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2018 . SD/ - SD/ - ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ( GEORGE GEORGE K. ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER COCHIN ; DATED : 29 TH AUGUST, 2018 . DEVDAS* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, COCHIN 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) - KOTTAYAM . 4. THE PR.CIT KOTTAYAM. 5. DR, ITAT, COCHIN 6 . GUARD FILE.