SINDHUDURG NAGRI SAHAKARI PATHPEDHI LTD , MUMBAI V. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, KALYAN, MUMBAI

ITA 2834/MUM/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Sindhudurg Nagri Sahakari Pathpedhi Ltd., a cooperative society, appealing against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) which upheld the disallowance of a deduction claimed under section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The deduction pertained to interest income from surplus funds deposited with cooperative banks. The Assessing Officer had initially disallowed the deduction, which was later confirmed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal, however, reversed this decision, citing precedents and judicial interpretations that supported the assessee's claim. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by similar cases and the understanding that cooperative banks, while not eligible for certain deductions under section 80P(4), do not affect the eligibility of cooperative societies for deductions on interest income under section 80P(2)(d).

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 301357 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 01-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 06-11-2022
• Other Referred Cases: Sindhudurg Nagri Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd.-vs- ACIT, DCIT-vs-Sindhudurg Nagri Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd., M/s Solitaire CHS Ltd. Vs. Pr.CIT-26, Mumbai, Land and Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO, M/s C. Green Cooperative Housing and Society Ltd. Vs. ITO-21(3)(2), Mumbai, Marvwanjee Cama Park Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. V's. ITO-Range 20(2)(2), Mumbai, Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Pemises Co-op. Society Ltd. Vs. ITO, 21(2)(1), Mumbai, Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society, State Bank Of India Vs. CIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SUBODH RATNAPARKHI
• Section: 263; 143(3); 80P; 2(19)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2834/M/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sindhudurg Nagri Sahakari Pathpedhi Ltd. Mumbai, “A” Wing, First Floor, Shivneri Co-Op Soc. Vardhaman Nagar, Shivaji Nagar Road, Ambernath, Kalyan. Maharashtra 421501 PAN AAAAS0887Q Vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2, Kalyan. ACIT CIRCLE-2, 2 nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Wayale Nagar, Khadak pada, Kalyan(W,) Mumbai Maharashtra 521301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri. Subodh Ratnaparkhi Revenue by : Shri. Ashish Kumar Deharia Date of Hearing : 02 . 01 . 2023 Date of Pronouncement : 17 . 01 . 2023 O R D E R Per : Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member: 1. Appellant, Sindhudurg Nagri Sahakari Pathpedhi Ltd.(„here in after, referred to as the Assessee‟) by filing aforesaid Appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 28.09.2022 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), for short the Ld.CIT(A) on the grounds alia that:- 1.The Hon. CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.19,20,726/- made by the ld AO by disallowing the deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) ITA No.2834/M/2022 SINDHUDURG NAGRI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI 2 of the LT. Act 1961 holding that the appellant was not entitled to the said deduction in view of the provisions u/s 80P(4) of the Income Tax Act 1961. 2. The Hon. CIT (A) has erred in disallowing the deduction of Rs.19,20,726/- claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the 1.T. Act 1961 and same may kindly be allowed. 3.The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal. 2. Briefly stated facts necessary for consideration an adjudication of the issues at hand are :- The Assessee being a Co-Op Society filed its return of income for the year under consideration declaring its total income at Rs.NIL. The Assessing Officer by making disallowance of Rs. 19,20,726/- u/s 80P (2)(d), on account of interest income from Co-Op Bank in respect of its surplus funds deposited with it by framing the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act. 3. Assessee Carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) by way of filing Appeal , who has confirmed the addition by dismissing the Appeal. Filling aggrieved with the impugned order passed by the Ld.CIT(A), Assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing present Appeal. 4. I have heard the Ld. Authorized Representative of the parties to the Appeal. Perused the order passed by the Lower Revenue Authorities and documents available on record in the light of the law applicable thereto. 5. The Ld.AR for the Assessee challenging the impugned order passed by Ld.CIT(A), contended inter alia that Ld.CIT(A) has erred in conforming the disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the ITA No.2834/M/2022 SINDHUDURG NAGRI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI 3 Act, relied upon the passed by co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in Assesses own case for the AY 2007-08 & for the AY 2008-09 , Sindhudurg Nagri Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd.-vs- ACIT, ITA No. 5185/Mum/2011 & 1186/Mum/2012, dt. 01.01.2016, & AY 2009-10 , DCIT-vs-Sindhudurg Nagri Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd., ITA No. 1935/Mum/2014, dt. 10.09.2015, However, on the other hand Ld. DR for the Revenue, relied upon the order passed by CIT(A). 6. We are of the considered view that, issue as to allow-ability of deduction claimed by the Assessee Society u/s 80P (2)(d) is no longer Res-Integra as the same has already been decided by the Tribunal in number of cases in favour of the Assessee and In one such case, the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in case of Palm Court M Premises Co-operative Society Ltd. in ITA No.561/M/2021 order dated 09.09.2022 decided the issue in favour of the assessee by distinguishing the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Totgar's Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. (supra) and by discussing the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court wherein it is held that interest income earned by the Co-operative Society on its investment made with co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act by returning following findings: "8. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the contentions advanced by the Id. Authorized representatives for both the parties in context of the aforesaid issue under consideration. As stated by the ld. A.R, and rightly so, the issue that interest received by a co-operative society on its deposits with co-operative banks would be eligible for deduction w/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act is covered in assessee's favour by orders of the various coordinate benches of the Tribunal in the following cases: ITA No.2834/M/2022 SINDHUDURG NAGRI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI 4 (i). M/s Solitaire CHS Ltd. Vs. Pr.CIT-26, Mumbai, ITA No.3155/Mum/2019, dated 29.11.2019 (ii). Land and Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO (2017) 46 CCH 52 (Mum.) (iii). M/s C. Green Cooperative Housing and Society Ltd. Vs. ITO-21(3)(2), Mumbai (ITA No. 1343/Mum/2017, dated 31.03.2017. (iv). Marvwanjee Cama Park Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. V's. ITO-Range 20(2)(2), Mumbai (ITA NO. 6139/Mum/2014, dated 27.09.2017. (v). Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Pemises Co-op. Society Ltd. Vs. ITO, 21(2)(1), Mumbai. In the aforesaid orders, it has been held by the Tribunal that though the cooperative banks pursuant to the insertion of sub- section (4) to Sec. 80P of the Act would no more be entitled for claim of deduction u/s 80P of the Act, but as a co-operative bank continues to be a co- operative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912) or under any other law for the time being in force in any State for the registration of co-operative societies, therefore, the interest income derived by a cooperative society from its investments held with a co-operative bank would be entitled for claim of deduction w/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. We find that the aforesaid issue had exhaustively been looked into by the ITAT, "G" bench, Mumbai in the case of M/s Solitaire CHS Ltd, Vs. Pr.CIT-26, Mumbai ITA No.3155/Mum/2019, dated 29.11.2019, wherein the Tribunal had observed as under: "6. We have heard the authorized representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, as well as the judicial pronouncements relied upon by them. Our indulgence in the present appeal has been sought, for adjudicating, as to whether the claim of the assessee for deduction under section. 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest income earned from the investments/deposits made with the co-operative banks is in order, or not. In our considered view, the issue involved in the present appeal revolves around the adjudication of the scope and gamut of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P as had been made available on the statute, vide the Finance Act 2006, with effect from 01.04.2007. On a perusal of the order passed by the Pr.CIT under Sec. 263 of the Act, we find, that he was of the view that pursuant to insertion of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P, the assessee would no more be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) in respect of the interest income that was earned on the amounts which were parked as investments/deposits with co-operative banks, other than a ITA No.2834/M/2022 SINDHUDURG NAGRI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI 5 Primary Agricultural Credit Society or a Primary Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank. Observing, that the co-operative banks from where the assessee was in receipt of interest income were not co-operative societies, the Pr. CIT was of the view that the interest income earned on such investments/deposits would not be eligible for deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 7. After necessary deliberations, we are unable to persuade ourselves to be in agreement with the view taken by the Pr. CIT. Before proceeding any further, we may herein reproduce the relevant extract of the aforesaid statutory provision, viz. Sec. 80P(2) (d), as the same would have a strong bearing on the adjudication of the issue before us. "80P(2) (d) (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 this section, the sums specified in subsection (2), in computing the total income of the assessee. (2). The sums referred to in sub-section (1) shall be the following, namely:- (a).................................................................................. (b)............................................................ (c)............................................................ (d) in 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;" On a perusal of Sec. 80P(2)(d), it can safely be gathered that interest income derived by an assessee co-operative society from its investments held with any other co-operative society shall be deducted in computing its total income. We may herein observe, that what is relevant for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) is that the interest income should have been derived from the investments made by the assessee co- operative society with any other co-operative society. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Pr. CIT, that with the insertion of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P, vide the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from 01.04.2007, the provisions of Sec. 80P would no more be applicable in relation to any co-operative bank, other than a primary agricultural credit society or a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank. However, at the same time, we are unable to subscribe to his view that the aforesaid amendment would jeopardise the claim of deduction of a co-operative society under Sec. 80P(2)(d) in respect of its interest income investments/deposits parked with a co-operative bank. In our considered view, as long as it is proved that the interest income is being derived by a co-operative society from its investments made with any ITA No.2834/M/2022 SINDHUDURG NAGRI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI 6 other co-operative society, the claim of deduction under the aforesaid statutory provision, viz. Sec. 80P(2)(d) would be duly available. We find that the term cooperative society" had been defined under Sec. 2(19) of the Act, as under:- "(19) "Co-operative society" means a cooperative society registered under the Cooperative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912), or under any other law for the time being in force in any state for the registration of co-operative societies;" We are of the considered view, that though the co-operative banks pursuant to the insertion of subsection (4) to Sec. 80P would no more be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P of the Act, but as a co-operative bank continues to be a co-operative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912), or under any other law for the time being in force in any State for the registration of co- operative societies, therefore, the interest income derived by a co-operative society from its investments held with a co- operative bank would be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2) (d) of the Act. 8. We shall now advert to the judicial pronouncements that have been relied upon by the Id. A.R. We find that the issue that a co-operative society would be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) on the interest income derived from its investments held with a co-operative bank is covered in favour of the assessee in the following cases: (i) Land and Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO (2017) 46 CCH $2 (Mum) (ii) M/s C. Green Cooperative Housing and Society Ltd. Vs. ITO-21(3)(2), Mumbai (ITA No. 1343/Mum/2017, dated 31.03.2017 (iii) Marvwanjee Cama Park Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO-Range-20(2)(2). Mumbai (ITA No. 6139/Mum/2014, dated 27.09.2017. (iv). Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Pemises Co-op. Society Ltd. Vs. ITO, 21(2)(1), Mumbai. We further find that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had held, that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006, also makes it clear ITA No.2834/M/2022 SINDHUDURG NAGRI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI 7 beyond any scope of doubt that the purpose behind enactment of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P was that the co-operative banks which were functioning at par with other banks would no more be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(4) of the Act. Insofar the reliance placed by the Pr. CIT on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. vs. ITO (2010) 322 ITR 283 (SC) is concerned, we are of the considered view that the being distinguishable on facts had wrongly been relied upon by him. The adjudication by the Hon"ble Apex Court in the aforesaid case was in context of Sec. 80P(2)(a)(i), and not on the entitlement of a co-operative society towards deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) on the interest income on the investments/deposits parked with a co-operative bank. Although, in all fairness, we may observe that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Totagars co-operative Sale Society (2017) 395 ITR 611 (Karn), had concluded that a co-operative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d). At the same time, we find, that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had observed, that the interest income earned by a co-operative society on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) of the Act. We find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon'ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), wherein it was observed that the interest income earned by a cooperative society on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. 9. Be that as it may, in our considered view, as the A.O while framing the assessment had taken a possible view, and therein concluded that the assessee would be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2) (d) on the interest income earned on its investments/deposits with cooperative banks, therefore, the Pr. CIT was in error in exercising his revisional ITA No.2834/M/2022 SINDHUDURG NAGRI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI 8 jurisdiction u/s 263 for dislodging the same. In fact, as observed by us hereinabove, the aforesaid view taken by the A.O at the time of framing of the assessment was clearly supported by the order of the jurisdictional Tribunal in the case of Land and Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO (2017) 46 CCH 52 (Mum). Accordingly, finding no justification on the part of the Pr. CIT, who in exercise of his powers under Sec. 263, had dislodged the view that was taken by the A.O as regards the eligibility of the assessee towards claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d), we "set aside" his order and restore the order passed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3), date 14.09.2016." As the facts and the issue involved in the present case before us remains the same as were there before the Tribunal in the case of M/s Solitaire CHS Ltd. (supra), wherein the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s 263 of the Act was quashed, we, thus, respectfully follow the same. Backed by our aforesaid deliberations, we are unable to uphold the view taken by the Pr. CIT that the failure on the part of the A.O to be disallow the assessee's claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) had rendered the assessment order passed by him u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 31.08.2017 as erroneous in so far it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 9. Accordingly, on the basis of our aforesaid observations, we herein not finding favor with the view taken by the Pr. CIT that the order passed by the A.O u/s 143(3), dated 31.08.2017 was erroneous in so far it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue within the meaning of Sec. 263 of the Act set-aside the same and restore the order passed by the A.O u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 31.08.2017." 8. Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in case of Pr. CIT & Anr.Vs. Totgar's Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. (2017) 292 ITR 74 (Kar.) and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of State Bank of India vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj.) had held that interest income earned by a co-operative society on its investment held with co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 9. So following the decision rendered by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court (supra) and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court (supra), and order passed by Tribunal in Assesses own case for preceding years, we are of the considered view that assessee society who has earned an amount of Rs.19,20,726/- from its ITA No.2834/M/2022 SINDHUDURG NAGRI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI 9 investment of surplus fund with co-operative banks is entitled for deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Resultantly, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the denial of deduction by the AO to the assessee under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 8. In view, of what has been discussed above and following the order passed by the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in case of Palm Court M Premises Co-operative Society Ltd.(Supra), and order passed by the Tribunal in Assesses own case in preceding years, we are of the considered view that the Assessee is entitled for deduction to the tune of Rs. 19,20,726/- claimed u/d 80P(2)(d) being the interest earned in respect of its surplus funds deposited with Co-Op Bank. So Assessing Officer is directed to allow the deduction claimed by the Assessee. 9. Resultantly, Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.01.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (S RIFAUR RAHMAN) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 17.01.2023. * Mrs.Urmila Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The CIT (A) Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench ITA No.2834/M/2022 SINDHUDURG NAGRI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI 10 //True Copy// By Order Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.