The Gokak Taluka Primary Teachers Co-operative Society, Gokak V. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Gokak

ITA 213/PAN/2019

AI Insights

The case involves The Gokak Taluk Primary Teachers Coop Society, which appealed against the order of the CIT(A), Belgaum, concerning the assessment year 2010-2011. The primary contention was the denial of deduction under section 80P(2)(i)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer and CIT(A), treating the society as a 'cooperative bank' rather than a 'cooperative society'. The Tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs. CIT, clarified that the status of the assessee should be determined by its registration and not by the nature of its membership, thereby allowing the deduction claimed.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 136834 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: AllowedAllowed
• Bench Allotted: WT(D)
• Next Hearing Date: 12-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 11-03-2019
• Other Referred Cases: Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs. CIT [2021] 431 ITR 1 (SC), Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST Katiji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

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.213/PAN./2019 Assessment Year 2010-2011 The Gokak Taluk Primary Teachers Coop Society, Opp. JSS College, Falls Road, Gokak – 591 307 District : Belgaum Karnataka PAN AAAAT4120D vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Dr. Ghodageri Building, Main Road, Gokak – 591 307. District Belgaum Karnataka. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Sateesh Nadagouda For Revenue : Shri N. Shrikanth Date of Hearing : 13.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 26.07.2023 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010- 2011, arise against the CIT(A), Belgaum’s order dated 04.12.2013, in case ITA.No.131/BGM/11-12, in proceedings u/sec.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. The assessee pleads the following grounds in the instant appeal : 2 ITA.No.213/PAN./2019 1. “The order of the learned Assessing Officer is bad in law and on facts. 2. The learned Assessing Officer & CIT(A) have not considered the facts & submissions and not allowed deduction u/s 80P(2)(i)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The appellant craves leave to add or amend any Ground of Appellant.” 3. Suffice to say, the sole substantive issue between the parties is that of sec.80P(2)(i)(a) deduction of Rs.62,89,701/- which has been disallowed by both the learned lower authorities respective orders, thereby treating the assessee as a cooperative bank than a “cooperative society” u/s.2(19) of the Act. 4. Learned DR vehemently argued during the course of hearing before us that not only this assessee is “a cooperative bank” but also it comprises of both regular as well as nominal members. We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant arguments seeking to invoke sec.80P(iv) of the Act in light of hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in in Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd., vs. CIT [2021] 431 ITR 1 (SC) holding that an assessee’s status has to be seen as per it’s registration and nature of membership hardly forms the eligibility criteria to deny the impugned deduction. We accept the assessee’s instant sole substantive grievance accordingly. 3 ITA.No.213/PAN./2019 5. We find at the outset that the assessee’s instant appeal instituted on 12.03.2029 suffers from 1806 days delay which is treated to be attributable to various communication gaps and other miscellaneous reasons. Hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision Collector, Land Acquisition vs., MST Katiji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) has settled the law long back that all such technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice. We, therefore, condone the impugned delay. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 26.07.2023. Sd/- Sd/- [G.D. PADMAHSHALI] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 26 th July, 2023 VBP/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A), Belgam. 4. The JCIT, Range-2, Belgaum. 5. D.R. ITAT, Panaji Bench, Panaji 6. Guard File. //By Order// Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.