The iTO, Wd-2(4), Trivandrum V. Vilappil Service Co-op Bank Ltd, Trivandrum

ITA 398/COCH/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9178 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A S BINDHU
• Keywords: Business income; Question of law; Competent authority; Set aside
• Section: 80P

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJAR I, AM & SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JM ITA NO. 397 /COCH/201 9 : ASST.YEAR 201 4 - 201 5 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2( 4 ) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM . VS. M/S. MYLACHEL SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD., BANK BUILDING, MYLACHEL OTTASEKHARAMANGALAM TRIVANDRUM 695 125. PAN : AAAAM5703D . (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 398 /COCH/201 9 : ASST.YEAR 2012 - 2013 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2( 4 ) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM . VS. M/S. VILAPPIL SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD., VP/V/209, PEYAD P.O. PEYAD JUNCTION TRIVANDRUM - 695 573. PAN : AAAAV4785E . (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 404 /COCH/201 9 : ASST.YEAR 201 1 - 201 2 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, RANGE 2 THIRUVANANTHAPURAM . VS. M/S. CHAYAM SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD., PO CHETTCHEL P.O.VIA VITHURA TRIVANDRUM - 695 511 PAN : AAAAC6909M . (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT. A.S.BINDHU, SR.DR RESPONDENTS BY : - -- NONE - -- DATE OF HEARING : 26.06.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.07 .2019 O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, JM : THESE APPEALS AT THE INSTANCE OF THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A). SINCE COMMON ISSUE IS ITA NO. 397 /COCH /201 9 & ORS. M/S. MYLACHEL SCB LTD. & ORS. 2 INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS, THEY WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 2. THERE IS A DELAY OF 77 DAYS IN FILING APPEAL IN ITA NO.404/COCH/2019. THE REVENUE HAS FILED PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. WE HAVE PERUSED THE REASONS STATED FOR FILING THE APPEAL BELATEDLY. WE FIND THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DELAYED FILING OF THE APPEAL AND NO LATCHES CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE REVENUE. HENCE, WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND PROCEED TO DISPOSE OFF THE SAME ON MERITS. 3 . THE SOLITARY ISSUE RAISED IN THESE APPEALS IS WHETHER THE ASSESSEES ARE ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT? 4 . BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS FOLLOWS: THE ASSESSEES IN THESE CASES ARE REGISTERED AS CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES UNDER THE KERALA STATE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1969. THE ASSESSMENTS WERE COMPLETED IN ASSESSEES CASE BY DENYING DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DENYING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT, TREATED THE ASSESSEES AS CO - OPERATIVE B ANKS AND NOT CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES. 5 . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSEES FILED APPEALS BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THE CIT(A) BY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHIRAKKAL SE RVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. (384 ITR 490) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT. ITA NO. 397 /COCH /201 9 & ORS. M/S. MYLACHEL SCB LTD. & ORS. 3 6 . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A), THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE IDENTICAL GROUNDS RAISED IN ALL THESE APPEAL S READ AS FOLLOWS: - 1. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), TRIVANDRUM ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT 'THE APPELLANT IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P OF THE ACT ON THE BUSINESS INCOME AND THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED ON THE DEPOSITS WITH THE OTHER BANKS AND THE TREASURY IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/ S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT.' 2. THE PRESENT APPEAL INVOLVES THE FOLLOWING SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW ON THE ISSUE OF DEDUCTION U/ S 80P OF THE, ACT: (I) THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE NOTICED THAT THE RESPONDENT IS ESSENTIALLY, A CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND NOT MERELY A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY AND HENCE THE ALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S 80 P TO THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE WHILE COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME WAS I RREGULAR IN NATURE AND ALSO AGAINST LAW. (II) RECENTLY, THE FULL BENCH OF THE HON BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA HAS OVER RULED THE DECISION OF M / S CHIRAKKAL SCB (ON WHICH CIT(A) RELIED UPON) THAT THE CO - OP SOCIETY WHICH HAD BEEN GRANTED REGISTRATION BY THE REGISTRAR OF CO - OP SOCIETY IS ENTITLED TO THE BENEFIT OF SEE 80P AND THAT THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITY CANNOT GO INTO THE AVAILABILITY OF THE EXEMPTION U/ S 80P IS NO MORE GOOD LAW. IT IS ALSO HELD THAT THE DECISION OF THE DIVISION BENCH IN PERINTHALMANNA SCB H AS BEEN DECLARED TO BE THE CORRECT POSITION IN LAW. (III) THE HON BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN THE CASE OF PERINTHALMANNA SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LD REPORTED IN (2014) 363 ITR 68 (KERALA) HAS HELD THAT 'WITH INTRODUCTION OF SECTION 80P(4) NECESSARILY, AN ENQUIRY HAS TO BE CONDUCTED INTO FACTUAL SITUATION WHETHER CO - OPERA TIVE BANK IS CONDUCTING BUSINESS AS A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK AND DEPENDING UPON TRANSACTIONS, ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO EXTEND BENEFITS AVAILABLE, AND HE WOULD NOT MERELY LOOK AT THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED UNDER THE RELEVAN T CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT OR AT NO MENCLATURE OF COOPERATIVE BANK'. (IV) LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE JU DGEMENT OF HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CITIZEN CO - ITA NO. 397 /COCH /201 9 & ORS. M/S. MYLACHEL SCB LTD. & ORS. 4 OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 9(1), HYDERABAD DATED 08.08.2017 REPOR TED IN 397 ITR 1 (SC), WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IF A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY IS VIOLATING THE PRINCIPLE OF MUTUALITY IN THE GRAB OF PERSONS WHO ACTUALLY ARE NOT REAL MEMBERS AND INDULGING IN BANKING BUSINESS PER SE THAT IT CANNOT CLAIM THE BENEFIT OF SECT ION 80P(2)(A)(I). (V) THE LD.CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SABARKHANTA ZILLA KHARID VECHAR SANGH LTD. VS CIT REPORTED IN 203 ITR 1027 (SC) HAS HELD THAT ELIGIBLE DEDUCTION U/S 81(1)(D) (SUBSTITUTED BY SECTION 8 0P BY FINANCE (NO.2)ACT, 1967 W.E.F. 01.04.1968) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IN RESPECT OF CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES/BANKS DOING BOTH AGRICULTURAL AND NON AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES SHOULD NOT BE 100% OF THE GROSS PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS OF SUCH SOCIETIES ETC. BUT WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE PROFITS GENERATED FROM AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES ALONE PERFORMED BY SUCH ASSESSEE.' 3. THE PRESENT APPEAL INVOLVES SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ON THE ISSUE OF ELIGIBILITY OF INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY THE APPELLANT FROM OTHE R BANKS AND TREASURY, AS WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS CORRECT: (I) IN NOT DULY CONSIDERING THAT THE INTEREST INCOME RECEIVED FROM DEPOSITS MADE WITH BANKS CANNOT BE ATTRIBUTABLE AS PROFIT AND GAINS FROM OUT OF PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS U/ S 80P(A)(I)? (II) IN NOT DULY CONSIDERING THAT TRIVANDRUM DISTRIC T COOPERATIVE BANK LTD IS APEX BANK AND NOT CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY AND CANNOT BE EQUATED WITH PACS OR PCARDB U/ S 80P(4) R W S 80P? (III) IN NOT DULY CONSIDERING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INVESTED SURPLUS FUNDS LIKE AN ORDINARY INVESTOR AND IT HAS TO BE TAXED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES? (IV) IN NOT DULY CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF THE APEX COURT IN 322 ITR 283 IN THE CASE OF M/ S TOTGARS CO - OPERATIVE SALES SOCIETY. 4. FOR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE ADVANCED AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE ORDER OF TH E LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), T HIRUVANANTHAPURAM ON THE ABOVE POINTS MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER RESTORED. ITA NO. 397 /COCH /201 9 & ORS. M/S. MYLACHEL SCB LTD. & ORS. 5 7 . THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED ON THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEALS. FURTHER, THE LEARNED DR PLACED RELIANCE ON THE LATEST JUDGMENT OF THE LARGER BENCH OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF THE MAVILAYI SERVICE CO - OPERATIV E BANK LTD. V. CIT [ITA NO.97/2016 ORDER DATED 19 TH MARCH, 2019] . 8 . NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEES, HOWEVER, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL S ON MERITS, AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPR E SENTATIVE. 9 . WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARN ED DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LARGER BENCH OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF THE MAVILAYI SERVICE CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. (SUPRA) HELD THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO CONDUCT AN INQUIRY INTO THE FACTUAL SITUATION AS T O THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY TO DETERMINE THE ELIGIBILITY OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT. IT WAS HELD BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT BOUND BY THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF KERALA CO - OP ERATIVE SOCIETY CLASSIFYING THE ASSESSEE - SOCIETY AS A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HELD THAT EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR IS SEPARATE AND ELIGIBILITY SHALL BE VERIFIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EACH OF THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. THE FINDING OF THE LA RGER BENCH OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT READS AS FOLLOWS: - 33. IN VIEW OF THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE APEX COURT IN CITIZEN CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY [397 ITR 1] IT CANNOT BE CONTENDED THAT, WHILE CONSIDERING THE CLAIM MADE BY AN ASSESSEE SOCIETY FOR DEDUCTION UND ER SECTION 80P OF THE IT ACT, AFTER THE ITA NO. 397 /COCH /201 9 & ORS. M/S. MYLACHEL SCB LTD. & ORS. 6 INTRODUCTION OF SUB - SECTION (4) THEREOF, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO EXTEND THE BENEFITS AVAILABLE, MERELY LOOKING AT THE CLASS OF THE SOCIETY AS PER THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION ISSUED UNDER THE CENTRAL OR STATE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT AND THE RULES MADE THEREUNDER. ON SUCH A CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P OF THE IT ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO CONDUCT AN ENQUIRY INTO THE FACTUAL SITUATION AS TO THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY AND ARRIVE AT A CONCLUSION WHETHER BENEFITS CAN BE EXTENDED OR NOT IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS UNDER SUB - SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P. 33. IN CHIRAKKAL [384 ITR 490] THE DIVISION BENCH HELD THAT THE APPELLANT SOCIETIES HAVING BEEN CLASSIFIED AS PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL C REDIT SOCIETIES BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER THE KCS ACT, IT HAS NECESSARILY TO BE HELD THAT THE PRINCIPAL OBJECT OF SUCH SOCIETIES IS TO UNDERTAKE AGRICULTURAL CREDIT ACTIVITIES AND TO PROVIDE LOANS AND ADVANCES FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES, THE RATE OF INTEREST ON SUCH LOANS AND ADVANCES TO BE AT THE RATE TO BE FIXED BY THE REGISTRAR OF CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES UNDER THE KCS ACT AND HAVING ITS AREA OF OPERATION CONFINED TO A VILLAGE, PANCHAYAT OR A MUNICIPALITY AND AS SUCH, THEY ARE ENTITLED FOR THE BENEFI T OF SUB - SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P OF THE IT ACT TO EASE THEMSELVES OUT FROM THE COVERAGE OF SECTION 80P AND THAT, THE AUTHORITIES UNDER THE IT ACT CANNOT PROBE INTO ANY ISSUES OR SUCH MATTERS RELATING TO SUCH SOCIETIES AND THAT, PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CRED IT SOCIETIES REGISTERED AS SUCH UNDER THE KCS ACT AND CLASSIFIED SO, UNDER THE ACT, INCLUDING THE APPELLANTS ARE ENTITLED TO SUCH EXEMPTION. 34. IN CHIRAKKAL [384 ITR 490] THE DIVISION BENCH EXPRESSED A DIVERGENT OPINION, WITHOUT NOTICING THE LAW LAID DO WN IN ANTONY PATTUKULANGARA [2012 (3) KHC 726] AND PERINTHALMANNA [363 ITR 268]. MOREOVER, THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE DIVISION BENCH IN CHIRAKKAL [384 ITR 490] IS NOT GOOD LAW, SINCE, IN VIEW OF THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE APEX COURT IN CITIZEN CO - OPERATIVE SOC IETY [397 ITR 1], ON A CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, BY REASON OF SUB - SECTION (4) THEREOF, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO CONDUCT AN ENQUIRY INTO THE FACTUAL SITUATION AS TO THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY AND ARRIVE AT A CONCLUSION WHETHER BENEFITS CAN BE EXTENDED OR NOT IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS UNDER SUB - SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P OF THE IT ACT. IN VIEW OF THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE APEX COURT IN CITIZEN CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY [397 ITR 1] THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE DIVI SION BENCH PERINTHALMANNA [363 ITR 268] HAS TO BE AFFIRMED AND WE DO SO. 35. IN VIEW OF THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE APEX COURT IN ACE MULTI AXES SYSTEMS CASE (SUPRA), SINCE EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR ITA NO. 397 /COCH /201 9 & ORS. M/S. MYLACHEL SCB LTD. & ORS. 7 IS A SEPARATE UNIT, THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE IS IN NO MANNER DEFEATED BY NOT ALLOWING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P OF THE IT ACT, BY REASON OF SUB - SECTION (4) THEREOF, IF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY CEASES TO BE THE SPECIFIED CLASS OF SOCIETIES FOR WHICH THE DEDUCTION IS PROVIDED, EVEN IF IT WAS ELIGIBLE IN THE INITI AL YEARS. 9 .1 IN VIEW OF THE DICTUM LAID DOWN BY THE FULL BENCH OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT, THE ISSUE OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) IS RESTORED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL EXAMINE THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEES AND DETERMINE WHE THER THEIR ACTIVITIES ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ACTIVITIES OF A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY FUNCTIONING UNDER THE KERALA CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1969 AND GRANT DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2) IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 10 . IN THE RESULT, THE A PPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 08 TH DAY OF JULY , 2019 . SD/ - SD/ - ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ( GEORGE GEORGE K. ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER COCHIN ; DATED : 08 TH JULY , 2019 . DEVDAS* ITA NO. 397 /COCH /201 9 & ORS. M/S. MYLACHEL SCB LTD. & ORS. 8 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, COCHIN 1. THE APPELLANT S 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM . 4. THE PR.CIT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM . 5. DR, ITAT, COCHIN 6 . GUARD FILE.