M/s Jai Hanuman Credit Souhardh Sahakari Limited, Ingali, Belgavi V. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax , Belagavi

ITA 154/PAN/2019

AI Insights

The case revolves around the eligibility of M/s. Jai Hanuman Credit Souhardh Sahakari Limited to claim deductions under section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was contested by the PCIT, Belgavi. The primary legal contention was whether the assessee, registered as a 'Souharda' cooperative society under state laws, qualifies as a 'cooperative society' under the federal definition in section 2(19) of the Act. The Tribunal referenced a recent decision by the Karnataka High Court, which affirmed that 'Souharda' societies are indeed 'cooperative societies' as per the Act. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the PCIT's revision directions and upheld the Assessing Officer's original assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 136830 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: WT(D)
• Next Hearing Date: 11-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 24-04-2019
• Other Referred Cases: Sri Matha Vivododdesha Pathina Souharda Sahakari Niyamitha vs. Union of India
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SACHIN NICHALE
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.154/PAN./2019 Assessment year 2014-2015 M/s. Jai Hanuman Credit Souhardh Sahakari Limited, A/p : Ingali, Chikodi Taluka of Belgavi District, State of Karnataka. PIN – 591 201 PAN AABAT0857G vs. The PCIT, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Road, Opp. Civil Hospital, Belagavi. PIN – 590 001 State of Karnataka. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Sachin Nichale For Revenue : Shri N. Shrikanth Date of Hearing : 12.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 18.07.2023 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2014- 2015, arise against the PCIT, Belgavi’s order F.No.263/Pr.CIT/ BGV/2018-19/1772 dated 21.02.2019, involving proceedings u/sec.263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"). Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing that the sole dispute between the parties is that of assessee’s eligibility to claim sec.80P deductions which duly stood accepted by the assessing authority(ies) in the correspondent assessment; 2 ITA.No.154/PAN./2019 u/sec.143(3) of the Act. To be more precise, the solitary substantial issue between the parties is regarding correctness of learned PCIT’s revision directions terming the Assessing Officer’s corresponding regular assessment framed hereinabove as an erroneous one causing prejudice to interest of the Revenue for having treated this taxpayer as a “cooperative society” registered u/sec.2(19) of the Act. We wish to reiterate once again that the Revenue’s stand before us in light of the PCIT’s revision directions is that the assessee is not a “cooperative society” within the meaning of sec.2(19) of the Act being only a “Souharda” society registered under the state law(s). It therefore, vehemently argued before us that the PCIT’s revision directions in the impugned assessment year deserve to be upheld in very terms. 3. All these Revenue’s arguments fail to evoke our concurrence as the instant issue of assessee; a “Souharda” cooperative society being covered u/sec.2(19) of the Act, is no more res integra in light of the valuable guidance coming from hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s recent decision [2022] 134 taxmann.com 62 (Kar.) Sri Matha Vivododdesha Pathina Souharda Sahakari Niyamitha vs. Union of India. Their lordships’ have settled the law therein that a “Souharda” cooperative society registered under the state cooperative law(s) very well forms “a cooperative society” u/sec.2(19) of the 3 ITA.No.154/PAN./2019 Act. That being the case, we accept the assessee’s contentions challenging correctness of the learned PCIT’s revision directions in the impugned assessment year. The Assessing Officer’s corresponding regular assessment stand restored as a necessary corollary. Ordered accordingly. 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 18.07.2023. Sd/- Sd/- [G.D. PADMAHSHALI] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 18 th July, 2023 VBP/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The PCIT, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Road, Opp. Civil Hospital, Belagavi. 4. The JCIT, Range-2, Belagavi. 5. D.R. ITAT, Panaji Bench, Panaji. 6. Guard File. //By Order// Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.