ITO, CHENNAI V. M/s. Veerakeralam Primary Agricultural Co-op. Soceity, Coimbatore

ITA 2882/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8122 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 06-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 32; 147; 131; 68; 246; 69; 145; 27; 148; 54; 37; 6; 56; 263; 63; 132; 12; 28; 144; 10; 90; 154; 2; 11; 15; 271(1)(b); 139; 92

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI . , . , BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./I.T.A. NO.2882/MDS/2016. / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-2014. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD(2) COIMBATORE VS. M/S. VEERAKERALAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE SOCIETY, NO.17, PERIYA THOTTAM COLONY, VEERAKERALAM, COIMBATORE 641 007. [PAN AAAAV3131G] ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) ! ' # / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. A.V. SREEKANTH, IRS, JCIT. $% ! ' # /RESPONDENT BY : NONE & ' '( /DATE OF HEARING : 02-01-2017 )* ' '( /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06-01-2017 ! / O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, IT IS AGGRIE VED THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ALLOWED CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ITA NO.2882/MDS/2016. :- 2 -: U/S.80 P(2)(A)(I) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HER EIN AFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT). 2. ASSESSEE WAS DENIED DEDUCTION OF ?5,08,85,733/- CLA IMED BY IT U/S. 80 P (2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT BY THE LD. ASSESS ING OFFICER RELYING ON SEC. 80P(4) OF THE ACT. AS PER LD. ASSESSING OFFIC ER, ASSESSEE THOUGH IT CLAIMED ITSELF A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIET Y, IT WAS DOING BANKING BUSINESS AS DEFINED IN SECTION 5(B) OF BANK ING REGULATION ACT, 1949. IN THE OPINION OF LD. ASSESSING OFFICER, THE RE WAS A SPECIFIC PROHIBITION IN SEC. 80P(4) OF THE ACT, WHEREBY CO- OPERATIVE BANKS COULD NOT AVAIL THE DEDUCTION U/S.80P(2) OF THE ACT . HE DENIED THE CLAIM. 3. WHEN THE MATTER REACHED THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (APPEALS), HE HELD THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AS A COOPERATIVE BANK WITHIN THE MEANING OF SEC. 80P(4) OF THE ACT. ACCORDING TO HIM, ASSESSEE WAS ONLY A PRIMARY AGRIC ULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY WHICH WAS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S.80 P(2 )(A)(I) OF THE ACT, FOR INTEREST RECEIVED FROM ITS MEMBERS. IN TAKING T HIS VIEW, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD FOLLOWED T HIS TRIBUNAL ORDER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 08-2009 IN ITA NO.2287/MDS/2013, DATED 21.03.2014. ITA NO.2882/MDS/2016. :- 3 -: 4. NOW BEFORE US, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE WAS UNABLE TO BRING UP ANY CASE WHERE A VIEW IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE WAS TAKEN. APPLICATION OF SEC. 80P(4) OF THE ACT IS ONL Y ON COOPERATIVE BANKS AND NOT ON PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIET Y. LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAVING FOLLOWED THE TRIBUNA L ORDER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR EARLIER YEAR, WE DO NOT FIN D ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH HIS ORDER. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DI SMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED ON FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JANUAR Y, 2017, AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( . ) (G. PAVAN KUMAR) $ % / JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- ( . ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) & % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER +& / CHENNAI , / DATED:6TH JANUARY, 2017. KV - ' $'./ 0/' / COPY TO: 1 . ! / APPELLANT 3. 1' () / CIT(A) 5. /45 $'6 / DR 2. $% ! / RESPONDENT 4. 1' / CIT 6. 57 8& / GF