SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED, Kota V. ITO, Kota

ITA 281/JPR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9646 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 10-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K RAWAT JT CIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: S R SHARMA; R K BHATRA
• Keywords: Business income; Set aside
• Section: 80P; 37; 56

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKWO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;K NO ] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM AND SHRI VIKRAM SING H YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 281 & 282/JP/2017 & 87/JP/2018 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13, 13-14 & 14-15. SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., NEAR ING SCHOOL, SHRIPURA, KOTA. CUKE VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3), KOTA. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AACAS 3060 P VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.R. SHARMA (CA) & SHRI R.K. BHATRA (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI A.K. RAWAT (JT. CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 03.06.2019. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17/06/2019. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER BENCH : THESE THREE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AG AINST THREE SEPARATE ORDERS OF LD. CIT (A) DATED 4 TH JANUARY, 2017, 3 RD JANUARY, 2017 AND 28 TH NOVEMBER, 2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2012-13 TO 14-15 RESP ECTIVELY. COMMON GROUND HAS BEEN RAISED IN THESE APPEALS. THE GROUND FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER :- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT (A) IS WRONG, UNJUST AND HAS ERRED IN LAW IN CO NFIRMING ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN DISALLOWING DEDU CTION OF RS. 48,97,480/- CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT U/S 80P/80P(2) (D) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 ON INTEREST INCOME ON FDR(S) WITH KO TA NAGRIK SEHKARI BANK LTD. AND OTHERS. 2 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. 2. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE PERMISSION TO ADD TO OR AMEND TO ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OR TO WITHDRAW A NY OF THEM. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1916. THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS GOVER NED BY THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT AND RAJASTHAN CO-OPERATIVE RULES AMENDED FROM T IME TO TIME. AS IT IS APPARENT FROM THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY, IT WAS FORME D FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE RAJASTHAN STATE GOVERNMENT EDUCATI ON DEPARTMENT, KOTA DISTRICT AND THE SAID EDUCATION DEPARTMENT ALONE CAN BECOME ITS MEMBERS. THE NATURE AND PURPOSE OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY FOR MUTUAL BENEFIT OF THE MEMBERS BY ACCEPTING DEPOSITS FROM MEMBERS AND GIVING CREDIT TO THE NEED Y MEMBERS IS NOT IN DISPUTE. THE ONLY DISPUTE IS REGARDING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTIO N UNDER SECTION 80P IN RESPECT OF INTEREST RECEIVED FROM KOTA NAGARIK SAHAKARI BANK L TD. AND ON FDRS MADE WITH THE SCHEDULED BANKS WAS DENIED BY THE AO BY APPLYING TH E PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P(4) OF THE IT ACT. THE AO DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEDU CTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF THE IT ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EARN ED INTEREST ON FDRS WHICH IS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES , NOT BUSINESS INCOME TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF T HE IT ACT. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO. 3. BEFORE US, THE LD. A/R OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMI TTED THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAS INVESTED A SUM OF ABOUT RS. 5,00,00,000/- IN KO TA NAGARIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD., THE INTEREST EARNED THEREON INCLUDING INTEREST FROM FIXED DEPOSITS IN THE SCHEDULED BANKS/NATIONALIZED BANKS IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A) AS WELL AS 3 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT. THE LD. A/R HAS SUBMITTED TH AT THE INTEREST IS EARNED ON THE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE COOPERATIVE BANK AS WELL AS OT HER NATIONALIZED BANKS/SCHEDULED BANKS OF ASSESSEES OWN SURPLUS FUN D. AS THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE ACTIVITY OF RECEIVING THE DEPOSITS FROM THE MEMBERS AND ALSO GIVES CREDIT TO THE MEMBERS, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAS TO KEEP THE FUND IN THE OTHER COOPERATIVE BANKS AS WELL AS NATIONALIZED BANKS/SCH EDULED BANKS. THE LD. A/R HAS POINTED OUT THAT THE AO AND LD. CIT (A) HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. KARNATAKA STATE CO -OPERATIVE APEX BANK LTD., 251 ITR 194 (SC) AS WELL AS IN CASE OF TOTAGARS CO-OPE RATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. VS. ITO, 322 ITR 283 (SC) WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EARNE D THE INTEREST INCOME ON THE MONEY OF THE OUTSIDERS BUT THE ASSESSEES OWN SURPL US FUND WAS DEPOSITED IN THE COOPERATIVE BANKS AS WELL AS COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION, HE HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIO NAL HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAHAKARI KRAY VIKRAY SANGH LTD. DAT ED 01.09.2016 IN DB IT APPEAL NOS. 139/2002, 20, 24 & 27/2004 AND SUBMITTED THAT BY FOLLOWING THE SAID DECISION, THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF ITO VS. SHREE KESHORAI PATA N SAHAKARI SUGAR MILL, BUNDI VIDE ORDER DATED 31.01.2018 IN ITA NO. 418 & 419/JP/2017 HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. A/R HAS ALSO RELIE D UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE TELANGANA & ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN CASE OF VA VVERU CO-OPERATIVE RURAL BANK LTD. VS. CHIEF CIT, 396 ITR 371 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS CONSIDERED ALL THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 8 0P(2) AND HELD THAT THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY IN FIX ED DEPOSITS IN NATIONALIZED BANKS 4 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. OF THEIR OWN MONEY, YIELD INTEREST INCOME IS ELIGIB LE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A) OF THE ACT. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D/R HAS SUBMITTED THA T THE AO AS WELL AS THE LD. CIT (A) HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREM E COURT AND, THEREFORE, ONCE THE INTEREST EARNED ON THE FIXED DEPOSITS IS NOT INCOME FROM THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE, THEN THE SAME IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTI ON UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A) OF THE ACT BUT THE SAME IS ELIGIBLE ONLY UNDER SECTION 80P (2)(D) IF IT IS EARNED FROM THE DEPOSITS MADE IN ANY OTHER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES. THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE THE DEPOSITS IN THE BANKS WHICH ARE COOPERATIVE BANKS, NATIONALIZED BANKS AND OTHER SCHEDULED BANKS. THEREFORE, NONE OF THE DEPOSITS W ERE MADE IN THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES. HENCE THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80(2)( C) OR (D) IS NOT AVAILABLE IN RESPECT OF SUCH INTEREST WHICH IS NOT THE BUSINESS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. D/R HAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE CO-OPERATIVE BAN K IS NOT COVERED UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(D) AS IT IS NOT A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE SOCIETYS MAIN ACTIVITY IS TO ACCEPT DEPOSITS FROM MEMBERS AND GIVING CREDIT TO THE MEMBERS ON INTEREST AS A PRUDE NCE MANAGEMENT AND IN LARGE INTEREST OF DEPOSITORS OF THE SOCIETY. THE ASSESSE E IS REQUIRED TO MANAGE THE FUNDS TO MULTIPLY THE INCOME AS WELL AS TO KEEP THE LIQUI DITY. THEREFORE, THE MONEY DEPOSITED WITH THE BANK ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS E ARNED THE INCOME IS ASSESSEES OWN FUND AND NOT A FUND WHICH WAS WITHHELD OR PAYAB LE EITHER TO THE MEMBERS OR TO ANY OTHER PERSON. THE AO AND THE LD. CIT (A) HAS R ELIED UPON THE DECISION OF 5 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. HONBLE SUPREME COURT INCLUDING THE DECISION IN CAS E OF TOTAGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. VS. ITO (SUPRA) WHEREIN THE HONBLE SU PREME COURT HAS CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT THE INTEREST EARNED BY THE SAID CO-OPERAT IVE SOCIETY WAS IN RESPECT OF THE MONEY WHICH WAS SHOWN AS LIABILITY IN THE BALANCE S HEET TO BE PAYABLE TO THE PERSONS FROM WHOM THE PURCHASES WERE MADE. THEREFO RE, THE SAID INTEREST INCOME WAS CONSIDERED NOT EARNED FROM THE ASSESSEES REGUL AR BUSINESS ACTIVITY. WE NOTE THAT THIS TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF ITO VS. SHREE KESHORA I PATAN SAHAKARI SUGAR MILL (SUPRA) WHILE CONSIDERING AN IDENTICAL ISSUE HAS HELD IN PA RA 6 TO 6.4 AS UNDER :- 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE ENTIRE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS ONLY FROM INTEREST ON DEPOSITS MADE WITH BANK AS WE LL AS COOPERATIVE BANKS. THE ASSESSEE IN ITS COMPUTATION OF INCOME HAS GIVEN THE DETAILS OF THE INTEREST INCOME WHICH COMPRISES THE GROSS INTEREST RECEIPT OF RS. 2 ,85,47,071/- OUT OF WHICH INTEREST EARNED ON THE DEPOSITS IN SAVING BANK WITH SBBJ OF RS. 34,779/-. THE BALANCE INTEREST RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IS FROM THE DEPOSITS MADE WITH COOPERATIVE BANKS EXCEPT THE SMALL AMOUNT OF RS. 3,221/- AS INTEREST ON MOLL ASSES FUND. AFTER REDUCING THE INTEREST PAID ON FDR LOANS FROM BUNDI CENTRAL CO-OP ERATIVE BANK OF RS. 20,03,200/-, THE NET INTEREST INCOME WAS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSE E AT RS. 2,65,43,871/-. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(C)(II) IN RES PECT OF THE INTEREST DEPOSIT IN SAVING BANK WITH SBBJ OF RS. 34,779/- AND DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D) IN RESPECT OF THE INTEREST FROM COOPERATIVE BANKS OF RS. 2,65,09,092/ -. THE AO DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN TOTO, ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESS EE IS NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF BANKING OR NOT PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS. THE LD. CIT(A) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING THE VARIOUS DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT AS WELL AS THIS TRIBUNAL AS UNDER:- THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/ S 80P (2)(D) OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF INTEREST OF RS. 2,65,43,870/ - ON FIXED 6 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. DEPOSITS WITH COOP. BANKS. THE AO DISALLOWED THE SA ID DEDUCTION AS CLAIMED BY THE BY REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BY HO LDING THAT SINCE THE APPELLANT ASSESSEE WAS NOT CARRYING OUT ANY COMMERC IAL ACTIVITIES SINCE YEAR 2000, IT WAS NOT PROVIDING ANY CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS, SO IT WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P (2) (A) (I) AND OTHE R SUB SECTIONS OF SECTION 80P. FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE IT IS CLEAR THAT THE APP ELLANT WHICH IS A CO- OPERATIVE SUGAR MILL UNDER LIQUIDATION SINCE 2003, IN ORDER TO COMPENSATE IT FOR RECLAMATION OF SOME PART OF THE LAND OWNED BY I T, THE STATE GOVERNMENT HAS GIVEN IT A COMPENSATION AMOUNT PREVIOUSLY WHICH HAD BEEN INVESTED IN BANK DEPOSITS BY THE APPELLANT & FROM WHICH INTERES T THE DAY TO DAY EXPENSES ARE BEING MET. THE A.O. HAS APPARENTLY NOT UNDERSTOOD THE PROVISIO NS INVOLVED & APPLIED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P (2) (A)(I) IN THE CASE. S UBSEQUENTLY HE HAS HELD THAT THE SOCIETY IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ANY OTHER DEDUCTION S U/S 80P. IT IS NOTABLE THAT THE ASSESSEE SUGAR MILL HAS NO O THER INCOME BESIDES THE INTEREST INCOME, BEING IN LIQUIDATION. IN ORDER TO CLAIM DEDUCTION U/S 80P (2)(D) OF THE ACT, THE ONLY CONDITION IS THAT THE A SSESSEE SHOULD BE A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY AND IT SHOULD BE HAVING INTERES T INCOME ACCRUED FROM INVESTMENT WITH OTHER COOPERATIVE SOCIETY (INCLUDIN G CO-OP. BANKS) WHICH IS A PART OF ITS GROSS TOTAL INCOME. WHILE THE ABOVE CASES ARE MORE ON ALLOWABILITY OF G ROSS INTEREST U/S 80P (2)(D), THEY EMPHASIZE THE ALLOWABILITY OF INTEREST RELATED DEDUCTION AS SUCH. THIS ISSUE HAS FINDINGS IN THE LANDMARK ORDER, HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF TOTAGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. VS . ITO 322 ITR 283 283 HELD THAT THE INTEREST INCOME FROM THE SHORT TERM DEPOSI TS AND SECURITIES NOT IMMEDIATELY REQUIRED IN THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSE E IS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCE AND NO DEDUCTION U/ S 80P(A)(I) OF THE ACT IS ALLOWABLE. THUS THE SAID DECISION WAS DELIVERED BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT ON THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. IN THE CASE OF TOTAGAR'S CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD V/ S ITO (SUPRA) THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT WHILE INTERPRETING THE SECTIO N 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT HELD THAT SURPLUS FUNDS NOT IMMEDIATELY REQUIRED IN THE BUSINESS AND INVESTED IN THE SHORT TERM DEPOSIT WOULD BE ASSESSA BLE UNDER THE HEAD 7 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. 'INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES' WHERE THE CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS AND CONSEQUENTLY NO DEDUCTION IS ALLOWABLE U/S 80P( 2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. THUS, FROM A PERUSAL OF THE PROVISIONS OF U/S 80P(2 )(A)(I) AND 80P(2)(D) IT IS CLEAR THAT THE FORMER DEALS WITH DEDUCTION IN RESPE CT OF PROFITS AND GAIN OF BUSINESS IN CASE OF THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY CARRYI NG ON BUSINESS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS IF TH E SAID INCOME IS ASSESSABLE AS INCOME FROM BUSINESS WHEREAS LATTER PROVIDES FOR DE DUCTION IN RESPECT OF INCOME BY WAY INTEREST AND DIVIDEND DERIVED BY ASSE SSEE FROM ITS INVESTMENTS WITH OTHER COOPERATIVE SOCIETY. THUS IT IS AMPLY CLEAR THAT A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY CAN ONLY AVAIL DEDUCTION U/S 80 P(2)(A)(I) IN RESPECT OF ITS INCOME ASSESSABLE AS BUSINESS INCOME AND NOT AS INC OME FROM OTHER SOURCES IF IT CARRIES ON BUSINESS OF THE BANKING OR PROVIDI NG CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS AND HAS INCOME ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD BU SINESS WHEREAS FOR CLAIMING U/S 80P(2)(D) IT MUST HAVE INCOME OF INTER EST AND DIVIDEND ON INVESTMENTS WITH OTHER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY MAY OR MAY NOT BE ENGAGED IN THE BANKING FOR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS AND THE HEAD UNDER WHICH THE INCOME IS ASSESSABLE IS NOT MATERIAL FOR THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER THIS SECTION. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF TOTAGAR'S C O-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD.(SUPRA) HELD THAT A SOCIETY HAS SURPLUS FUNDS W HICH ARE INVESTED IN SHORT TERM DEPOSITS WHERE THE SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN THE B USINESS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS IN THAT CASE THE SAID INCOME FROM SHORT TERM DEPOSITS SHALL BE TREATED AND ASSESSED A S INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND DEDUCTION U/S 80(P)(2)(A)(I) WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE MEANING THEREBY THAT DEDUCTION U/S 80(P)(2)(A)(I) IS AVAILA BLE ONLY IN RESPECT OF INCOME WHICH IS ASSESSABLE AS BUSINESS INCOME AND N OT AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. WHEREAS IN DISTINCTION TO THIS , THE PROVI SIONS OF SECTION 80(P)(2)(D) OF THE ACT PROVIDES FOR DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF INC OME OF A COOP SOCIETY BY WAY OF INTEREST OR DIVIDEND FROM ITS INVESTMENTS WI TH OTHER COOP SOCIETY IF SUCH INCOME IS INCLUDED IN THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME O F THE SUCH COOP SOCIETY. THE ITAT, MUMBAI HAS ALSO HELD THE SAME VIEW IN THE CASE OF LANDS END COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY VS. I.T.O. WARD-16(1)(3 ), MUMBAI IN ITA NO. 8 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. 3566/MUM/ 2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 VIDE OR DER DATED 15/01/2016. IN VIEW THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES I AM OF THE V IEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO THE DEDUCTION OF RS.2, 65, 43,870/- IN RESPECT OF INTEREST RECEIVED/DERIVED BY IT OR414BSITS WITH COOP. BANKS UNDER SECTION 80(P)(2)(D). THEREFORE THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ABOVE DI SALLOWANCE AND SUBSEQUENT ADDITION MADE U/S 56 ACCORDINGLY. IN THE RESULT, THIS GROUND OF ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 6.1 AS REGARDS THE CLAIM U/S 80P(2)(D), WE FIND THA T THE ONLY CONDITION FOR AVAILING THE DEDUCTION UNDER THIS PROVISION IS ANY INCOME BY WAY OF INTEREST OR DIVIDEND DERIVED BY THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM ITS INVESTMENT WITH ANY OTHER COOPERATIVE SOCIETY, THE WHOLE OF SUCH INCOME IS ALLOWABLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(1). THEREFORE, THERE IS NO CONDITION FOR THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY TO ENGAGED IN TH E ACTIVITY OF PROVIDE CREDITS TO THE MEMBERS OR BANKING BUSINESS FOR AVAILING THE DEDUCT ION U/S 80P(2)(D) READ WITH SECTION 80P(1) OF THE ACT. AS REGARDS THE COOPERATI VE BANK SHALL BE TREATED AS COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE INTERE ST INCOME ON INVESTMENT IN SUCH COOPERATIVE BANK U/S 80P(2)(D) THE MUMBAI BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF LANDS END CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. VS. ITO (SUPR A), AFTER CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF TOTAGARS C O-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. VS. ITO (SUPRA) HAS CONSIDERED AND DECIDED THIS ISSUE I N PARA 8.3 AS UNDER:- 8.3 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSE D THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) ENHANCED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BY REJECTING THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT OF RS.14,88,107/- BEING INTEREST ON INVESTMENT WITH OTHER COOP. BANKS BY FO LLOWING THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF BANDRA SAMRUDDIHI CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.(SUPRA) WHICH WAS PASSED ON THE BASIS OF THE DECISION PASSE D BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF TOTAGAR'S CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. IN THE CASE OF TOTAGAR'S CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD V/S ITAT (SUPRA) THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT WHILE INTERPRETING THE SECTION 80P(2) (A)(I) OF THE ACT HELD THAT SURPLUS FUNDS NOT IMMEDIATELY REQUIRED IN THE BUSINESS AND INVESTED IN THE SHORT TERM DEPOSIT WOULD BE ASSESSABLE UNDER TH E HEAD 'INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES' WHERE THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS EN GAGED IN CARRYING ON 9 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. BUSINESS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS AND CONSEQUENTLY NO DEDUCTION IS ALLOWABLE U/S 80P(2)(A )(I) OF THE ACT. WHEREAS IN THE CASE BEFORE US THE ISSUE IS WHETHER A CO-OPE RATIVE SOCIETY WHICH HAS DERIVED INCOME ON INVESTMENT WITH COOPERATIVE BANKS IS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D). THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT PROVIDE DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF INCOME BY WAY OF IN TEREST OR DIVIDEND ON INVESTMENTS MADE WITH OTHER COOPERATIVE SOCIETY. F OR THE PURPOSES OF BETTER PROPER UNDERSTANDING OF THESE TWO PROVISIONS THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE SECTION ARE REPRODUCED BELOW: 80P: DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF INCOME OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES. 1. WHERE, IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSSEE BEING A CO-OPERA TIVE SOCIETY, THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME, INCLUDES ANY INCOME REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (2), THERE SHALL BE DEDUCTED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH AND SUB JECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION, THE SUMS SPECIFIED IN S UB-SECTION (2), IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE SUMS REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (1) SHALL BE TH E FOLLOWING, NAMELY:- (A) IN THE CASE OF A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN- (I) CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CR EDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS. THE WHOLE OF THE AMOUNT OF PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUS INESS ATTRIBUTABLE TO ANY ONE OR MORE OF MUCH ATTRIBUTES. (D) IN RESPECT OF ANY INCOME BY WAY OF INTEREST OR DIVIDENDS DERIVED BY THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM ITS INVESTMENTS WITH ANY O THER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, THE WHOLE OF SUCH INCOME.' FROM THE CLOSE PERUSAL OF THE PROVISIONS OF U/S 80P (2)(A)(I) AND 80P(2)(D) IT IS CLEAR THAT THE FORMER DEALS WITH DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF PROFITS AND GAIN OF BUSINESS IN CASE OF THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS IF THE SAID INCOME IS ASS ESSABLE AS INCOME FROM BUSINESS WHEREAS LATTER PROVIDES FOR DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF INCOME BY WAY INTEREST AND DIVIDEND DERIVED BY ASSESSEE FROM ITS INVESTMENTS W ITH OTHER COOPERATIVE SOCIETY. THUS IT IS AMPLY CLEAR THAT A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY C AN ONLY AVAIL DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D)(I) IN RESPECT OF ITS INCOME ASSESSABLE AS BUSINESS INCOME AND NOT AS INCOME 10 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. FROM OTHER SOURCES IF IT CARRIES ON BUSINESS OF THE BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS AND HAS INCOME ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD BUSINESS WHEREAS FOR CLAIMING U/S 80P(2)(D) IT MUST HAVE INCOME OF INTER EST AND DIVIDEND ON INVESTMENTS WITH OTHER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY MAY OR MAY NOT BE E NGAGED IN THE BANKING FOR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS AND THE HEAD UNDER WHICH THE INCOME IS ASSESSABLE IS NOT MATERIAL FOR THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTI ON UNDER THIS SECTION. NOW WILL EVALUATE THE ASSESSEE'S CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE DE CISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF TOTAGAR'S C O-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD.(SUPRA) HELD THAT A SOCIETY HAS SURPLUS FUNDS W HICH ARE INVESTED IN SHORT TERM DEPOSITS WHERE THE SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINE SS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS IN THAT CASE THE SAID INC OME FROM SHORT TERM DEPOSITS SHALL BE TREATED AND ASSESSED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCE S AND DEDUCTION U/S 80(P)(2)(A)(I) WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE MEANING THERE BY THAT DEDUCTION U/S 80(P)(2)(A)(I) IS AVAILABLE ONLY IN RESPECT OF INCO ME WHICH IS ASSESSABLE AS BUSINESS INCOME AND NOT AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. WHEREA S IN DISTINCTION TO THIS , THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80(P)(2)(D) OF THE ACT PROVID ES FOR DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF INCOME OF A COOP SOCIETY BY WAY OF INTEREST OR DIVI DEND FROM ITS INVESTMENTS WITH OTHER COOP. SOCIETY IF SUCH INCOME IS INCLUDED IN T HE GROSS TOTAL INCOME OF THE SUCH COOP SOCIETY. IN VIEW THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO THE DEDUCTION OF R S. 14,88,107/-IN RESPECT OF INTEREST RECEIVED/DERIVED BY IT ON DEPOSITS WITH COOP. BANKS AND THEREFORE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED BY REVERSING THE ORDER OF THE C IT(A). THE AO IS DIRECTLY ACCORDINGLY. 6.2 WE FURTHER NOTE THAT THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAHAKARI KRAY VIKRAY SANGH LTD. (SU PRA) BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SURAT VAN KAR SAHAKARI SANGH LTD. VS. ACIT, 72 TAXMANN.COM 169 HAS HELD IN AS UNDER: 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE DECISIONS CITED BY LEARN ED ADVOCATE FOR THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE REVENUE. WE FEEL THAT THE D ECISIONS CITED BY THE LEARNED ADVOCATE FOR THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE APPLICAB LE ON THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. IN THE CASE OF K. NANDAKUMAR V. ITO [ 1993] 204 ITR 856/[1994] 72 TAXMAN 223 (KER.), THE KERALA HIGH COURT HAS HEL D AS UNDER: 11 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. '4. THE EFFECT OF SECTION 80AB IS THAT, FOR THE PUR POSE OF COMPUTING THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80L, THE AMOUNT OF INCO ME OF THAT NATURE AS COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISION S OF THE ACT SHALL ALONE BE DEEMED TO BE THE AMOUNT OF INCOME OF THAT NATURE. WHAT THE SECTION MEANS IS THAT THE NET INCOME BY WA Y OF INTEREST COMPUTED IN THE MANNER PROVIDED BY THE PROVISIONS O F THE ACT SHALL ALONE BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR COMPUTING THE BENEF IT. BUT IT MUST BE NOTED THAT PAYMENT OF INTEREST UNDER A LOAN TRAN SACTION INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DERIVING INCOME FROM BUSINESS IS NOT AN ITEM WHICH ARISES IN THE COMPUTATION OF INTEREST INCOME 'IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS' OF THE ACT. THE SAID AMOUNT HA S TO BE PAID IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER ANY INTEREST INCOME IS OTHE RWISE RECEIVED OR NOT. THOUGH THE INTEREST IS PAYABLE TO THE SAME BAN K, THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE AMOUNT OF INCOME BY-WAY OF INTERES T IS NOT CALCULATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT WITH REF ERENCE TO SUCH OUTGOINGS WHICH FALL UNDER DIFFERENT HEADS. THE ASS ESSEE IS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 37 OF ALL EXPENDITURE IN CURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DERIVING THE BUSINESS INCOME, AND IT IS UNDER THAT HEAD THAT THE INTEREST PAID ON THE LOAN TAKEN FROM THE B ANK IS DEDUCTED. THE NET AMOUNT OF INTEREST CONTEMPLATED BY SECTION 80AB SHOULD TAKE IN THE NET AMOUNT ARRIVED AT AFTER MEETING THE EXPENSES DEDUCTIBLE FROM THAT ITEM UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF T HE ACT AS EXPLAINED ABOVE. THAT IS NOT THE CASE HERE. THEREFO RE, SECTION 80AB HAS NO APPLICATION TO THE FACTS OF THESE CASES. THE INTEREST PAID ON THE LOAN TRANSACTIONS HAS TO BE DEDUCTED FROM THE B USINESS INCOME, AND NOT FROM THE INTEREST RECEIVED FROM THE BANK ON THE FIXED DEPOSITS. THE ASSESSEES WERE THEREFORE RIGHT IN THE SUBMISSIONS WHICH THEY MADE BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-T AX IN THE REVISION PETITIONS WHICH THEY FILED. THIS ASPECT OF THE MATTER HAS BEEN OVERLOOKED BY THE COMMISSIONER IN PASSING THE ORDER, EXHIBIT P-5.' 8.1 SIMILARLY, IN THE CASE OF DOABA CO-OPERATIVE SU GAR MILLS LTD (SUPRA), THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT HAS HELD AS UNDER: '5. THE CONTENTION OF MR. GUPTA, LEARNED COUNSEL AP PEARING FOR THE REVENUE, IS THAT THE TRIBUNAL WAS WRONG IN ALLOWING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2) (D) OF THE ACT BECAUSE IT IS NOT EST ABLISHED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DERIVED THE INTEREST BY INVESTING ALL THE AMOUNT OF SURPLUS FUNDS. IT IS FURTHER CONTENDED BY MR. GUPTA THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID INTEREST TO JALANDHAR CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK AND HAS ALSO RECEIVED INTEREST FROM THE SAID CO- OPERATIVE BANK, THEREBY SHOWING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ON THE AGGREGATE PAID INTEREST TO THE BANK AND, THEREFORE, NO DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P (2)(D) CAN BE ALLOWED. TO APPRECIATE THIS ARGUMENT, WE HAVE TO LO OK TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT, FOR FAC ILITY OF REFERENCE, IT IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER : 12 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. '80P. (2)(D) IN RESPECT OF ANY INCOME BY WAY OF INT EREST OR DIVIDENDS DERIVED BY THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM ITS INVEST MENTS WITH ANY OTHER CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY, THE WHOLE OF SUCH INCO ME.' 6. SO FAR AS THE PRINCIPLE OF INTERPRETATION APPLIC ABLE TO A TAXING STATUTE IS CONCERNED, WE CAN DO NO BETTER THAN TO Q UOTE THE BY-NOW CLASSIC WORDS OF ROWLATT J., IN CAPE BRANDY SYNDICA TE V. IRC [1921] 1 KB 64, 71 : '...IN A TAXING ACT, ONE HAS TO LOOK MERELY AT WHAT IS CLEARLY SAID. THERE IS NO ROOM FOR ANY INTENDMENT. THERE IS NO EQ UITY ABOUT A TAX. THERE IS NO PRESUMPTION AS TO A TAX. NOTHING IS TO BE READ IN, NOTHING IS TO BE IMPLIED. ONE CAN ONLY LOOK FAIRLY AT THE L ANGUAGE USED,' 7. THE PRINCIPLE LAID DOWN BY ROWLATT J., HAS ALSO BEEN TIME AND AGAIN APPROVED AND APPLIED BY THE SUPREME COURT IN DIFFERENT CASES INCLUDING THE ONE, HANSRAJ GORDHANDAS V. H. H. DAVE , ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, AIR 1970 S C 755, 759. 8. SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT ALLOWS WHOLE DEDUCT ION OF AN INCOME BY WAY OF INTEREST OR DIVIDENDS DERIVED BY THE CO-O PERATIVE SOCIETY FROM ITS INVESTMENT WITH ANY OTHER CO-OPERATIVE SOC IETY. THIS PROVISION DOES NOT MAKE ANY DISTINCTION IN REGARD T O SOURCE OF THE INVESTMENT BECAUSE THIS SECTION ENVISAGES DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF ANY INCOME DERIVED BY THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM ANY INVESTMENT WITH A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY. IT IS IMMATERIAL WHETH ER ANY INTEREST PAID TO THE CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY EXCEEDS THE INTER EST RECEIVED FROM THE BANK ON INVESTMENTS. THE REVENUE IS NOT REQUIRE D TO LOOK TO THE NATURE OF THE INVESTMENT WHETHER IT WAS FROM ITS SU RPLUS FUNDS OR OTHERWISE. THE ACT DOES NOT SPEAK OF ANY ADJUSTMENT AS SOUGHT TO BE MADE OUT BY LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE. THE PROVISION DOES NOT INDICATE ANY SUCH ADJUSTMENT IN REGARD TO INTER EST DERIVED FROM THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM ITS INVESTMENT IN ANY OTHER CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT AGREE WITH THE ARGUMENT ADVANCED BY LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE. IN OUR OPINION, THE LEARNED TRIBUNAL WAS RIGHT IN LAW IN ALLOWING DEDUC TION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961. IN RESPECT OF INTEREST OF RS. 4,00,919 ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST RECEIVED FRO M NAWANSHALN CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK WITHOUT ADJUSTING THE INT EREST PAID TO THE HANK. THEREFORE, THE REFERENCE IS ANSWERED AGAINST THE REVENUE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE.' 8.2 MOREOVER, THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF BAI BHURIBEN LALLUBHAI (SUPRA) HAS HELD THAT THE PURPOSE FOR WHI CH THE ASSESSEE BORROWED MONEY HAD NO CONNECTION WHETHER DIRECT OR INDIRECT WITH THE INCOME WHICH SHE EARNED FROM THE FIXED DEPOSIT AND THAT SHE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED UNDER SEC TION 12(2). THE HIGH COURT HELD THAT IF AN ASSESSEE HAD NO OPTION E XCEPT TO INCUR AN EXPENDITURE IN ORDER TO MAKE THE EARNING OF AN INCO ME POSSIBLE, 13 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. THEN UNDOUBTEDLY THE EXERCISE OF THAT OPTION IS COM PULSORY AND ANY EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY REASON OF THE EXERCISE OF T HAT OPTION WOULD COME WITHIN THE AMBIT OF SECTION 12(2) OF THE INDIA N INCOME-TAX ACT BUT WHERE THE OPTION HAS NO CONNECTION WITH THE CAR RYING ON OF THE BUSINESS OR THE EARNING OF THE INCOME AND THE OPTIO N DEPENDS UPON PERSONAL CONSIDERATIONS OR UPON MOTIVES OF THE ASSE SSEE, THAT EXPENDITURE CANNOT POSSIBLY COME WITHIN THE AMBIT O F SECTION 12(2). IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE LOAN WAS TAKEN FOR BUSINES S PURPOSE MORE PARTICULARLY PURCHASE OF YARN AND NOT FOR FIXED DEP OSITS. 9. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE QUESTIONS RAISED IN TH E PRESENT APPEALS ARE ANSWERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS ACCORDINGLY QUASHED AND SET ASIDE. 6.3. FURTHER THE HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN CA SE OF PCIT AND ANOTHER VS. TOTAGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY 392 ITR 0074 AS RELIED UPON BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE AS HELD IN PARA 7 TO 11 AS UNDER :- 7. HOWEVER, THE CONTENTION BEING TAKEN BY THE LEAR NED COUNSEL IS UNTENABLE. FOR THE ISSUE THAT WAS BEFORE THE ITAT, WAS A LIMITED ONE, NAMELY WHETHER FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT, A CO-OPERATIVE BANK SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS A CO-OPER ATIVE SOCIETY OR NOT? FOR, IF A CO OPERATIVE BANK IS CONSIDERED T O BE A CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY, THEN ANY INTEREST EARNED BY THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM A CO-OPERATIVE BANK WOULD NECESSARILY BE DEDUCTABLE UNDER SECTION 80P(1) OF THE ACT. 8. THE ISSUE WHETHER A CO-OPERATIVE BANK IS CONSID ERED TO BE A CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS NO LONGER RES INTEGRA. FOR THE SAID ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE ITAT ITSELF IN DIFFERENT CASES. MOREOVER THE WORD 'CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY' ARE THE WORDS OF A LARG E EXTENT, AND DENOTES A GENUS, WHEREAS THE WORD 'COOPERATIVE BANK ' IS A WORD OF LIMITED EXTENT, WHICH MERELY DEMARCATES AND IDENTIF IES A PARTICULAR SPECIES OF THE GENUS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES. COOPER ATIVE SOCIETY CAN BE OF DIFFERENT NATURE, AND CAN BE INVOLVED IN DIFF ERENT ACTIVITIES; THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY BANK IS MERELY A VARIETY OF TH E COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES. THUS THE CO-OPERATIVE BANK WHICH IS A SP ECIES OF THE GENUS WOULD NECESSARILY BE COVERED BY THE WORD 'CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY'. 9. FURTHERMORE, EVEN ACCORDING TO SECTION 56(I)(CCV ) OF THE BANKING REGULATIONS ACT, 1949, DEFINES A PRIMARY CO-OPERATI VE SOCIETY BANK AS THE MEANING OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY. THEREFORE, A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY BANK WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE WORDS 'CO-OPE RATIVE SOCIETY'. 10. ADMITTEDLY, THE INTEREST WHICH THE ASSESSEE RES PONDENT HAD EARNED WAS FROM A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY BANK. THEREF ORE, ACCORDING 14 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. TO SEC. 80P(2)(D) OF THE I.T. ACT, THE SAID AMOUNT OF INTEREST EARNED FROM A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY BANK WOULD BE DEDUCTABL E FROM THE GROSS INCOME OF THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY IN ORDER T O ASSESS ITS TOTAL INCOME. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT JU STIFIED IN DENYING THE SAID DEDUCTION TO THE ASSESSEE RESPONDENT. 11. THE LEARNED COUNSEL HAS RELIED ON THE CASE OF T HE TOTGARS CO- OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. VS. INCOME TAX. OFFICER ,(SUPRA). HOWEVER, THE SAID CASE DEALT WITH THE INTERPRETATION, AND TH E DEDUCTION, WHICH WOULD BE APPLICABLE UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF T HE I.T. ACT. FOR, IN THE PRESENT CASE THE INTERPRETATION THAT IS REQUIRE D IS OF SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF THE I.T. ACT AND NOT SECTION 80P(2)(A) (I) OF THE I.T. ACT. THEREFORE, THE SAID JUDGMENT IS INAPPLICABLE TO THE PRESENT CASE. THUS, NEITHER OF THE TWO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF L AW CANVASSED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE EVEN ARISE IN T HE PRESENT CASE. 6.4 THUS, THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT THE CO-OPERATIVE BANK IS CONSIDERED TO A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 80P(2)(D). ACCORDINGLY, IN VIEW OF THE DECISIONS AS CITED (SUP RA), WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR OR ILLEGALITY IN THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO TH E EXTENT OF THE ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 80P(2)(D) IN RESPECT OF I NTEREST INCOME FROM DEPOSITS/FDRS WITH THE CO-OPERATIVE BANKS. THUS THE TRIBUNAL AFTER CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. RAJASTHAN RAJYA SAHAKARI KRAY VI KRAY SANGH LTD. (SUPRA) AS WELL AS THE DECISION OF HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN CASE OF PCIT VS. TOTAGARS CO- OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY, 392 ITR 74 (KAR.) HAS UPHEL D THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF T HE ACT. FURTHER, THE HONBLE TELANGANA & ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN CASE OF VA VVERU CO-OPERATIVE RURAL BANK LTD. VS. CCIT (SUPRA) HAS DISCUSSED THIS ISSUE IN D ETAIL IN PARA 28 TO 37 AS UNDER :- 28. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS . BEFORE CONSIDERING THE EFFECT OF THE VARIOUS DECISIONS CITED ON BOTH S IDES, WE THINK IT WOULD BE IDEAL TO LOOK AT THE STATUTORY PRESCRIPTION IN PURE AND SIMPLE FORM. AS WE HAVE INDICATED EARLIER, SECTION 80P(2) IS ACTUALLY DIVID ED INTO SIX PARTS, CATEGORISED 15 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. UNDER CLAUSES (A), (B), (C), (D), (E) AND (F). EACH ONE OF THESE CLAUSES DEAL WITH DIFFERENT TYPES OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ENGAGED I N DIFFERENT TYPES OF ACTIVITIES. THE BENEFIT MADE AVAILABLE TO EACH ONE OF THEM IS ALSO DIFFERENT FROM THE OTHER. THEREFORE, IT MAY BE USEFUL TO PRES ENT A TABULAR FORM, THE SIX CATEGORIES OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES COVERED BY CLA USES (A) TO (F) AND THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE BENEFIT AVAILABLE TO EACH ONE OF THEM, AS FOLLOWS : CATEGORY OF CO-OP. SOCIETIES COVERED BY NATURE AND EXTENT OF ( A ) (1) CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS ; (2) CO-OP. SOCIETY ENGAGED IN COTTAGE INDUSTRY ; (3) CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN MARKETING OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE GROWN BY ITS MEMBERS. (4) CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN PURCHASE OF AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENTS, SEEDS ETC., FOR THE PURPOS E OF SUPPLYING TO ITS MEMBERS ; (5) CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN PROCESSING OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE OF ITS MEMBERS WITHOUT THE AID OF POWER. (6) CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN COLLECTIVE DISPOSAL OF THE LABOUR OF ITS MEMBERS. (7) CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN FISHING OR ALLIED ACTIVITIES. THE WHOLE OF THE AMOUNT OF PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS ATTRIBUTABLE TO ANY ONE OR MORE OF SUCH ACTIVITIES. ( B ) PRIMARY CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN SUPPLYING MILK, OIL SEEDS, FRUITS OR VEGETABLES GRO WN BY ITS MEMBERS TO (1) A FEDERAL CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY, ENGAGED IN THE SAME BUSINESS ; (2) THE GOVERNMENT OR A LOCAL AUTHORITY ; (3) THE GOVERNMENT COMPANY OR CORPORATION ENGAGED IN THE SAME BUSINESS ; THE WHOLE OF THE AMOUNT OF PROFITS AND GAINS ON SUCH BUSINESS. ( C ) (1) A CONSUMER CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN ACTIVITIES 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 THE PROFITS AND GAINS ATTRIBUTABLE TO SUCH ACTIVITIES NOT EXCEEDING RS. 100,000 (ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND RUPEES). (2) CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY OTHER THAN A CONSUMER CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAG ED IN ACTIVITIES OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFIED IN CLAUSES (A) AND (B). SO MUCH TO THESE PROFITS AND GAINS ATTRIBUTABLE TO SUCH ACTIVITIES NOT EXCEEDING RS. 50,000 (FIFTY THOUSAND RUPEES). 16 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. ( D ) INTEREST OR DIVIDENDS DERIVED BY THE CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM ITS INVESTMENTS WITH ANY OTHER CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY ; THE WHOLE OF SUCH INCOME. ( E ) ANY INCOME DERIVED BY THE CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM THE LETTING OF GODOWNS OR WAREHOUSES FOR STORAGE, PROCESSING OR FACILITATING THE MARKETING O F COMMODITIES ; THE WHOLE OF SUCH INCOME. ( F ) A CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY OTHER THAN (1) A HOUSING SOCIETY ; (2) AN URBAN CONSUMER SOCIETY ; (3) A SOCIETY CARRYING ON TRANSPORT BUSINESS ; (4) A SOCI ETY ENGAGED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF ANY MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS WITH THE AID OF POWER, WHERE THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME DOES NOT EXCEED RS. 20,000 (TWENTY THOUSAND RUPEES). THE INCOME BY WAY OF INTEREST ON SECURITIES AND THE INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY CHARGEABLE UNDER SECTION 22. 29. FROM THE TABULAR FORM PRESENTED ABOVE, IT MAY BE C LEAR THAT THE DEDUCTIONS AVAILABLE UNDER CLAUSES (A) TO (C) ARE ACTIVITY-BAS ED. THE DEDUCTION AVAILABLE UNDER CLAUSES (D) AND (E) ARE INVESTMENT-BASED AND THE DEDUCTION UNDER CLAUSE (F) IS INSTITUTION-BASED. TO PUT IT DIFFERENTLY, (A) TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER CLAUSE (A), THE CLAIM SHOULD RELATE TO THE PR OFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS ATTRIBUTABLE TO ANYONE OR MORE OF THE ACTIVITIES LISTED IN CLAUSE (A), (B) TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER CLAUSE (B), THE SOCIETY SHOULD BE A PRIMARY SOCIETY ENGAGED IN S UPPLYING MILK, OILSEEDS, FRUITS, ETC. TO NAMED INST ITUTIONS, SUCH AS, GOVERNMENT, LOCAL AUTHORITY, FEDERAL CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY, OR GOVERNMENT COMPANY, (C) TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER CLAUSE (C), THE INSTITUTION MUST BE ENGAGED IN ACTIVITIES OTHE R THAN THOSE COVERED BY CLAUSES (A) AND (B) SUBJECT TO THE FURTHER CONDITION THAT SUCH PROFITS AND GAINS SHOULD NOT EX CEED A PARTICULAR LIMIT, (D) TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER CLAUSE (D), THE INCOME SHOULD BE DERIVED FROM INVESTMENTS WITH ANOTHER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, (E) TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER CLAUSE (E), THE INCOME SHOULD BE DERIVED FROM LETTING OF GODOWNS OR WAREHOUSES, ETC. 30. THEREFORE, WHAT FOLLOWS IS THAT WHEN A CO-OPERATIV E SOCIETY ENGAGED IN ANY ONE OF THE ACTIVITIES STIPULATED IN SUB-CLAUSES (I) TO (VII) OF CLAUSE (A) MAKES PROFITS AND GAINS OUT OF BUSINESS ATTRIBUTABLE TO A NYONE OF THOSE ACTIVITIES, THE CASE WOULD FALL UNDER CLAUSE (A). THE MOMENT THE IN COME DERIVED FROM ONE OF THOSE ACTIVITIES IS INVESTED IN ANOTHER CO-OPERATIV E SOCIETY AND AN INTEREST OR DIVIDEND IS DERIVED THEREFROM, THE CASE WOULD BE CO VERED BY CLAUSE (E). IN CASE THE PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS ARISING OUT OF TH E ACTIVITIES LISTED IN SUB- CLAUSES (I) TO (VII) OF CLAUSE (A) IS INVESTED IN I MMOVABLE PROPERTIES, SUCH AS, 17 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. GODOWNS OR WAREHOUSES AND AN INCOME IS DERIVED THER EFROM, THE CASE WOULD BE COVERED BY CLAUSE (E) OF SECTION 80P(2). 31. THE ONLY AREA OF DISTINCTION BETWEEN CLAUSE (A) ON THE ONE HAND AND CLAUSES (D) AND (E) ON THE OTHER HAND IS THAT THE B ENEFIT UNDER CLAUSE (A) IS RESTRICTED ONLY TO THOSE ACTIVITIES OF A CO-OPERATI VE SOCIETY ENLISTED IN SUB- CLAUSES (I) TO (VII) OF CLAUSE (A). ON THE OTHER HA ND, THE BENEFIT UNDER CLAUSES (D) AND (E) ARE AVAILABLE TO ALL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIE TIES, WITHOUT ANY RESTRICTION AS TO THE NATURE OF THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED ON BY THEM. 32. IN SIMPLE TERMS, THE POSITION CAN BE SUMMARISED LI KE THIS. IF THERE IS A CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY, WHICH IS CARRYING ON SEVERAL ACT IVITIES INCLUDING THOSE ACTIVITIES LISTED IN SUB-CLAUSES (I) TO (VII) OF CL AUSE (A), THE BENEFIT UNDER CLAUSE (A) WILL BE LIMITED ONLY TO THE PROFITS AND GAINS O F BUSINESS ATTRIBUTABLE TO ANY ONE OR MORE OF SUCH ACTIVITIES. BUT, IN CASE THE SA ME CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY HAS AN INCOME NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO ANY ONE OR MORE OF TH E ACTIVITIES LISTED IN SUB- CLAUSES (I) TO (VII) OF CLAUSE (A), THE SAME MAY GO OUT OF THE PURVIEW OF CLAUSE (A), BUT STILL, THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY MAY CLAIM THE BENEFIT OF CLAUSE (D) OR (E) EITHER BY INVESTING THE INCOME IN ANOTHER CO OPERAT IVE SOCIETY OR INVESTING THE INCOME IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF A GODOWN OR WAREHOUSE AND LETTING OUT THE SAME. 33. IN OTHER WORDS, THE BENEFIT CONFERRED BY CLAUSE (D ) UPON ALL TYPES OF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES IS RESTRICTED ONLY TO THE INVES TMENTS MADE IN OTHER CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES. SUCH A RESTRICTION CANNOT BE R EAD INTO CLAUSE (A), AS THE TEMPORARY PARKING OF THE PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSIN ESS IN NATIONALISED BANKS AND THE EARNING OF INTEREST INCOME THEREFROM IS ONL Y ONE OF THE METHODS OF MULTIPLYING THE SAME INCOME. TO ACCEPT THE STAND OF THE DEPARTMENT WOULD MEAN THAT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES CARRYING ON THE AC TIVITIES LISTED IN CLAUSES (I) TO (VII), WHICH INVEST THEIR PROFITS AND GAINS OF B USINESS EITHER IN OTHER CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES OR IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF GODOW NS AND WAREHOUSES, MAY BENEFIT IN TERMS OF CLAUSE (D) OR (E), BUT THE VERY SAME SOCIETIES WILL NOT BE ENTITLED TO ANY BENEFIT, IF THEY INVEST THE VERY SA ME FUNDS IN BANKS. SUCH AN UNDERSTANDING OF SECTION 80P(2) IS IMPERMISSIBLE FO R ONE SIMPLE REASON. THE BENEFITS UNDER CLAUSES (D) AND (E) ARE AVAILABLE IN GENERAL TO ALL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, INCLUDING SOCIETIES ENGAGED IN THE ACTIV ITIES LISTED IN CLAUSE (A). SECTION 80P(2) IS NOT INTENDED TO PLACE ALL TYPES O F CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ON THE SAME PEDESTAL. THE SECTION CONFERS DIFFERENT TY PES OF BENEFITS TO DIFFERENT TYPES OF SOCIETIES. SPECIAL TYPES OF SOCIETIES ARE CONFERRED A SPECIAL BENEFIT. 34. THE CASE BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT IN TOTGAR'S CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD.'S CASE ( SUPRA ) WAS IN RESPECT OF A CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY, WHICH WAS ALSO MARKETING THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE OF ITS MEMB ERS. AS SEEN FROM THE FACTS DISCLOSED IN THE DECISION OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COU RT IN TOTGARS, FROM OUT OF WHICH THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT AROSE, THE ASSESSEE WAS CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF MARKETING AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE OF T HE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY. IT IS ALSO FOUND FROM PARAGRAPH-3 OF THE DECISION O F THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN TOTGAR'S CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD.'S CASE ( SUPRA ) THAT THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY OTHER THAN MARKETING OF THE AGRICULTURAL P RODUCE ACTUALLY RESULTED IN NET LOSS TO THE SOCIETY. THEREFORE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IN TOTGARS WAS CARRYING ON SOME OF THE ACTIVITIES LISTED IN CLAUSE (A) ALONG WITH OTHER 18 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. ACTIVITIES. THIS IS PERHAPS THE REASON THAT THE ASS ESSEE DID NOT PAY TO ITS MEMBERS THE PROCEEDS OF THE SALE OF THEIR PRODUCE, BUT INVESTED THE SAME IN BANKS. AS A CONSEQUENCE, THE INVESTMENTS WERE SHOWN AS LIABILITIES, AS THEY REPRESENTED THE MONEY BELONGING TO THE MEMBERS. THE INCOME DERIVED FROM THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY RETAINING THE MONIES BELONG ING TO THE MEMBERS CANNOT CERTAINLY BE TERMED AS PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS. THIS IS WHY TOTGAR'S STRUCK A DIFFERENT NOTE. 35. BUT, AS RIGHTLY CONTENDED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CO UNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS, THE INVESTMENT MADE BY THE PETITIONERS IN FIXED DEP OSITS IN NATIONALISED BANKS, WERE OF THEIR OWN MONIES. IF THE PETITIONERS HAD IN VESTED THOSE AMOUNTS IN FIXED DEPOSITS IN OTHER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES OR I N THE CONSTRUCTION OF GODOWNS AND WAREHOUSES, THE RESPONDENTS WOULD HAVE GRANTED THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION UNDER CLAUSE (D) OR (E), AS THE CASE MAY BE. 36. THE ORIGINAL SOURCE OF THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE PETITIONERS IN NATIONALISED BANKS IS ADMITTEDLY THE INCOME THAT TH E PETITIONERS DERIVED FROM THE ACTIVITIES LISTED IN SUB-CLAUSES (I) TO (VII) O F CLAUSE (A). THE CHARACTER OF SUCH INCOME MAY NOT BE LOST, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE ST ATUTE USES THE EXPRESSION 'ATTRIBUTABLE TO' AND NOT ANY ONE OF THE TWO EXPRES SIONS, NAMELY, 'DERIVED FROM' OR 'DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO'. 37. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE PETITIONERS ARE ENTITLED TO SUCCEED. HENCE, THE WRIT PETITIONS ARE ALLOWED, AND THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO TREATING THE IN TEREST INCOME AS SOMETHING NOT ALLOWABLE AS A DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A), I S SET ASIDE. THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS AGAIN CONSIDERED THE DEC ISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF TOTAGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. VS. ITO (SUPRA) AND HELD THAT THE INTEREST EARNED ON THE DEPOSITS OF THE ASSESSEES O WN FUND MADE IN THE BANKS IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A) BEIN G THE SAID INCOME IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE. THOUGH T HERE ARE DIVERGENT VIEWS ON THIS ISSUE, HOWEVER, BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONBL E JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AS WELL AS THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL, WE DECIDE THIS IS SUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND ALLOW THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P/80P(2)(D) IN RESPECT OF INTEREST EARNED ON 19 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. DEPOSITS MADE WITH THE BANKS/COOPERATIVE BANKS. HE NCE THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON THIS ACCOUNT FOR ALL THE THREE YEARS IS DELET ED. 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE A RE ALLOWED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17/06/2 019. SD/- SD/- ( FOE FLAG ;KNO ) ( FOT; IKY JKWO (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV ) (VIJAY PAL RAO) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 17/06/2019. DAS/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT- SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHA KARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA. 2. THE RESPONDENT THE ITO, WARD 2(3), KOTA. 3. THE CIT(A). 4. THE CIT, 5. THE DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 281, 282/JP/2017 & 87/JP/201 8) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR 20 ITA NOS. 281, 282 & 87/JP/17 SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LTD., KOTA.