INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, NIPPANI, Nippani V. DR PRABJAKAR KORE CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI NIYAMI, ANKALI

ITA 219/PAN/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6303 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: WT(D)
• Next Hearing Date: 09-06-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 25-12-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P.S. SHIVASHANKAR
• Keywords: Competent authority

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT ITAT : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.219/PAN/2023 [E-APPEAL] Assessment Year - 2017-18 The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nemchand Bldg., 747, Ashok Nagar, Nippani – 591 237. Karnataka. vs. Dr. Prabjakar Kore Credit Souhard Sahakari Niyamit, Ankali, Chikodi Taluka, Belgaum District – 591 213 Karnataka. PAN AAAAA1797K (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shivanand Halbhavi For Revenue : Shri P.S. Shivashankar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 10.06.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 26.06.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18 arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”) Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/ NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1057802786(1), dated 08.11.2023 in proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act”). Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 2. The Revenue pleads the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal : 2 ITA No.219/PAN/2023 3. Suffice to say, the Revenue’s sole substantive grievance raised in the instant appeal seeks to revive the Assessing Officer’s action disallowing the assessee’s sec.80P(2)(a)(i) deduction of Rs.6,32,49,381/- on the ground that the sum represented interest income derived from nominal/associate members exceeding the specified strength as per the State Cooperative Law. Suffice to say, hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative 3 ITA No.219/PAN/2023 Bank Ltd., vs., CIT [2021] 431 ITR 1 (SC) has already rejected the Revenue’s very stand seeking to draw a distinction between a cooperative society regular members having voting and all other rights as against nominal/associate members. Faced with this situation, learned DR sought to highlight the fact that the assessee’s membership strength is in express violation of the State Cooperative Law. Be that as it may, we are only concerned with sec.80P deduction which indeed represents the assessee’s interest income derived from it’s nominal/associate members without inviting any action from the competent authority under the State Cooperative Law. We further wish to quote that hon’ble jurisdictional high court [2022] 134 taxmann.com 170 (Kar.) Government of India Ministry of Finance vs. Karnataka State Souharda Federal Co- operative Ltd., held that a “Souhardha” society is indeed a cooperative society entitled for the impugned deduction. Faced with this situation, we accordingly see no merit in the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance. Rejected accordingly. 4. This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed in above terms. 4 ITA No.219/PAN/2023 Order pronounced in the open Court on 26.06.2024. Sd/- Sd/- [RAMA KANTA PANDA] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 26 th June 2024 VBP/- Copy to 1. The applicant 2. The respondent 3. The Pr.CIT concerned 4. D.R. ITAT, Panaji Bench, Panaji 5. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // //True copy// Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.