IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI D.T. GARASIA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 43 0 &4 45 /PNJ/2013 : (ASST. YEARS : 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) SHRI MALLIKARJUN CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD, JUGUL, TAL : ATHANI, DIST BELGAUM - 590001 , (APPELLANT) PAN : AAAA S5616H VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) , DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD, OPP. CIVIL HOSPITAL, BELGAUM - 590001 , (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : S . V . HALBHAVI , C.A. REVENUE BY : SMT . SONAL L. SONKAVDE , LD. DR DATE OF HEARING : 19 /03/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 /03/2014 O R D E R PER P.K. BANSAL BOTH APPEAL S HA VE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDER OF CIT(A), BELGAUM DT D . 20.11.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 BY TAKING THE FOLLOWING COMMON EFFECTIVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL : - 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A ), BELGAUM HAS ERRED IN TREATING A CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY AS A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE BANK BY MAKING A NON - TAXABLE ENTITY INTO A TAXABLE ENTITY INTO A TAXABLE ENTITY WITHOUT VERIFYING THE LEGALITY ASPECT. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A), BELGAUM HAS WRONGLY APPLIED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P(4) OF IT ACT WHICH ARE APPLICABLE ONLY TO CO - OPERATIVE BANKS, AS PER THE AMENDMENT BROUGHT INTO FORCE FROM 01/04/2007. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A),BELGAUM HAS WRONGLY INTERPRETED THE DEFINITION OF INCOME VIDE SEC 2(24) (VIIA) INSERTED W.E.F. 01/04/2007. AS PER THE AMENDMENT ONLY BANKING INSTITUTIONS ARE AFFECTED AND NOT THE CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES LIKE OUR SOCIETY. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A), BELGAUM HAS NOT PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD THE INTENTION OF LEGISLATURE AND SPEECH OF HON. FINANCE MINISTER WHILE BRINGING NEW SECTION 80P (4) INTO THE ACT. 2 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) 5. THE LEARNED CIT(A ), BELGAUM HAS NOT APPRECIATED THE FACTS BROUGHT BEFORE HIM THAT THE BANKING REGULATION ACT 1949 AND THE RBI LICENSING POLICY ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO ASSESSEE SOCIETY. 6. THE LEARNED CIT(A), BELGAUM HAS ALSO NOT CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS OF THE HON. APPELLATE AUTHORITIES WHICH ARE IN FAVOURS OF THE APPELLANT SOCIETY. (I) BANGALORE COMMERCIAL TRANSPORT CREDIT C - OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, BANGALORE. ITA NO.130/AC - 3/AC - 3(1)/CIT (A) - II/2009 - 10 DT. 15/03/2010 DT 15/03/2010 . BY HON. CIT (A) - II, BANGALORE. (II) M/S DWARKA SOUHARD CREDIT SAHAKARI LTD. ITA NO.202/203/204/DCIT/CC PANAJI/CITA VI/2010 - 11 DT 20/10/2010 BY HON. CIT(A) BANGALORE. (III) BANGALORE COMMERCIAL TRANSPORT CREDIT CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD BANGALORE . ITA NO.1069/BANGALORE/2010 DT 08/0 4/2011.BY HON.ITAT, BANGALORE. (IV) SAMARTH URBAN CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD BELGAUM. ITA NO.662/BGM/2010 - 11 DT 28/11/2011. (V) ITO WARD 1(1) ERODE VS THE KASIPALAYAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO - OPERATIVE BANK LTD. [2013] 38 TAXMAN.COM 322 (CHENNAI TRIB.) 7. THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS ALSO JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS 11,981/ - COMMISSION PAID TO PIGMY AGENTS WITHOUT MAKING TDS, WITHOUT CON SI DERING THE CLARIFICATION ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DATED 03/03/2008, TO TREAT THE PIGMY DEPOSIT COLLECTORS COMMISSION AS WAGES U/S 192 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND NOT U/S 194H OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 8. THE AO IS ALSO NOT CORRECT IN INITIATING PENAL P ROVISIONS U/S 271 (1)(C) OF IT ACT 1961 THOUGH THERE IS NO CONCEALMENT. 2. SINCE POINTS INVOLVED IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE COMMON, BOTH THE PARTIES AGREED THAT BOTH THE APPEALS BE DISPOSED OF ON THE BASIS OF THE FACTS FOR THE A.Y.2009 - 10. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE FOR THE A.Y.2009 - 10 ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA STATE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT. THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN DECLARING GROSS TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 10,42,822 / - AND CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I ) AND THEREFORE NET 3 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) TAXABLE INCOME WAS SHOWN TO BE NIL. THE AO DID NOT ALLOW THE DEDUCTION TO THE ASSESSEE U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) AND THE INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT RS. 10,54,800 / - . THE AO WHILE DENYING THE DEDUCTION TO THE ASSESSEE U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) TOOK THE VIE W THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND THEREFORE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(4) ARE APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). CIT(A) DISMISSED BOTH THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE. 2.1 THE LD. AR BEFO RE US VEHEMENTLY CONTENDED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(4) ARE NOT APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. HE ALSO SUBMITTED WRITTEN SUBMISSION S . THE ASSESSEE IS NOT A CO - OPERATIVE BANK. THE ASSESSEE IS A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY DULY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA STATE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959. THE PRIMARY OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE IS TO ENCOURAGE THRIFT, SELF - HELP AND CO - OPERATION AMONG THE MEMBERS . FOR THIS, OUR ATTENTION WAS DRAWN TOWARDS THE BYE - LAW S OF THE ASSESSEE FROM (I) TO ( XI II). THE ASSESSEE IS A CREDIT SOCIETY. HE CONTENDED THAT THE WORD CREDIT IS OF OUTMOST IMPORTANT TO DECIDE THE STATUS OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE BANKING REGULATI ON ACT, 1949. ACCORDING TO HIM THE ASSESSEE IS A CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY BUT WHEN WE QUESTION THAT SECTION 80P DOES NOT TALK OF CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY, HE COULD NOT REPLY THERETO BUT RELIED ON BANKING REGULATION ACT FORGETTING THAT THE SECTION 80P ONLY USES THE WORD CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN - . THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE LIMITED TO ITS MEMBERS. THE PAID UP CAPITAL OF THE ASSESSEE, NO DOUBT, IS MORE THAN RS. 1 LACS. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE ISSUE IS DULY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE AS SESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. JAFARI MOMIN VIKAS CO - OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. IN TAX APPEAL NOS. 442 OF 2013, 443 OF 2013 AND 863 OF 2013. ATTENTION WAS ALSO DRAWN TOWARDS THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE KARNATA KA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARA SANGHA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. FOR THE PROPOSITION OF LAW BY REFERRING TO PARA 12 THAT MERELY BECAUSE THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS REQUIRED TO ADVANCE LOAN TO ITS MEMBERS, IT DOES NOT CEASE TO BE A CO - 4 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) OPERATIVE SOCIETY GOVERNED BY THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT NOR CAN THEY BE TREATED AS BANKING COMPANIES. THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY THE SOCIETY CANNOT BE REGARDED TO BE BANKING ACTIVITIES AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949. RE LIANCE WAS ALSO PLACED ON THE DECISION OF THE BANGALORE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 72/BANG/2013 IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. DIVYAJYOTHI CREDIT CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. FOR THE A.Y 2009 - 10 IN WHICH IT WAS HELD THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(4) ARE APPLI CABLE ONLY TO CREDIT CO - OPERATIVE BANKS AND NOT TO CREDIT CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. RELIANCE WAS ALSO PLACED ON THE DECISION OF THE PANAJI BENCH IN THE CASE OF DCIT VS. JAYALAKSHMI MAHILA VIVIDODESHAGALA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LTD. IN ITA NO. 1 TO 3/PNJ/2012 DT. 3 0.3.2012. RELIANCE WAS ALSO PLACED ON THE DECISION OF PANAJI BENCH IN ITA NO. 229 & 230/PNJ/2013 IN THE CASE OF TARANI MAHILA CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY, VS ITO. RELIANCE WAS ALSO PLACED IN ACIT VS PALHAWAS PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, 23 TAXMAN.COM 318 (DELHI), ITO VS JANKALYAN NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA LTD, 24 TAXMAN.COM 127 (PUNE). 2.2 THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND VEHEMENTLY CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A CO - OPERATIVE BANK. IN VIEW OF THE DEFINITION OF THE CO - OPERATIVE BANK G IVEN UNDER EXPLANATION TO SEC. 80P(4) THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BANKING. SEC. 80P(4) PUTS AN EMBARGO W.E.F. 1.4.2007 THAT IF A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS CARRYING ON BANKING BUSINESS, THE ASSESSEE WILL NOT BE ENTITLED FOR THE EXEMPTION. REL IANCE WAS PLACED ON THE DECISION OF HYDERABAD BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF THE CITIZEN CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY VS. ADDL. CIT IN ITA NOS. 1003/HYD/2011 & 1004/HYD/2011 DT. 2.7.2012. 3 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE S AME ALONGWITH THE ORDER OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW AS WELL AS THE DECISIONS AND THE ENTIRE MATERIAL AND CASE LAWS REFERRED TO BEFORE US. THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) AND WHETHER 5 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) THE ASSESSEE I S HIT BY THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(4) WHICH WAS INTRODUCED IN THE STATUTE BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2006 W.E.F. 1.4.2007. THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF BOTH THE SECTIONS ARE RE - PRODUCED FOR OUR READY REFERENCE AS UNDER : - 80P. (1) WHERE, IN THE CASE OF AN ASSES SEE 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 SUB - SECTION (2), IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. (2) THE SUMS REFERRED TO IN SUB - SECTION (1) SHALL BE THE FOLLOWING, NAMELY : (A) IN THE CASE OF A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN (I) CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS, OR THE WHOLE OF THE AMOUNT OF PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS ATTRIBUTABLE TO ANY ONE OR MORE OF SUCH ACTIVITIES. 80P(4) THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY IN RELATION TO ANY CO - OPERATIVE BANK OTHER THAN A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OR A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. EXPLANATION. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUB - SECTION, (A) 'CO - OPERATIVE BANK' AND 'PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY' SHALL HAVE THE MEANINGS RESPECTIVELY ASSIGNED TO THEM IN PART V OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949 (10 OF 1949); (B) 'PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK' MEANS A SOCIETY HAVING ITS AREA OF OPERATION CONFINED TO A TALUK A AND THE PRINCIPAL OBJECT OF WHICH IS TO PROVIDE FOR LONG - TERM CREDIT FOR AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES. 3.1 FROM THE PLAIN READING OF SEC. 80P(2)(A)(I) IT IS APPARENT THAT IF THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN CARRYING OF BUSINESS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS, THE CO - OPERAT IVE SOCIETY IS ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION ON WHOLE OF THE INCOME RELATING TO ANY ONE OR MORE OF SUCH BUSINESS. FROM THE READING OF SEC. 80P(4) IT IS APPARENT THAT THIS SECTION DENIES DEDUCTION TO A CO - OPERATIVE BANK OTHER THAN A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SO CIETY OR PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(4) WAS INTRODUCED IN THE STATUTE BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2006 W.E.F. 1.4.2007. 6 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) THE EXPLANATION TO THE SECTION DEFINES THE CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND PRIMARY AGRICULT URAL CREDIT SOCIETY TO HAVE THE SAME MEANING AS ASSIGNED TO THEM IN PART - V OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949. IT IS NOT THE CASE OF EITHER OF THE PARTIES THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. IT IS ALSO NO T THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ASSESSEE IS A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY. IF WE READ BOTH THE SECTIONS, SEC. 80P(2)(A)(I) AND SEC. 80P(4) TOGETHER, WE FIND THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(4) MANDATES THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P WILL NOT APPL Y TO ANY CO - OPERATIVE BANK OTHER THAN A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OR PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK BUT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(2)(A)(I), A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF BANKIN G OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS IS ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION. AFTER THE INSERTION OF SEC. 80P(4), THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(2)(A)(I) WERE NOT AMENDED, RATHER THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF BANKING FACILITIES TO I TS MEMBERS CONTINUED TO BE ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I). THIS PRE - SUPPOSES THAT EVERY CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF BANKING CANNOT BE REGARDED TO BE A CO - OPERATIVE BANK. THE EMBARGO PUT U/S 80P(4) ARE APPLICABLE ONLY TO A CO - OPERATIVE BANK. IN OUR OPINION, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY CANNOT CARRY ON BUSINESS OF BANKING FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS EVEN IF IT IS NOT A CO - OPERATIVE BANK. IF WE READ THE PROVISIONS IN THE MANNER THAT EVERY CO - OPERATIVE SOC IETY ENGAGED IN CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF BANKING EVEN FOR ITS MEMBERS IS REGARDED TO BE A CO - OPERATIVE BANK, THEN, THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(2)(A)(I) WILL BECOME REDUNDANT. THEREFORE, IN OUR OPINION, BEFORE DECIDING THE ISSUE WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS ENTIT LED FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I), IT IS ESSENTIAL TO DECIDE WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS A CO - OPERATIVE BANK OTHER THAN A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OR A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. IN CASE IT IS FOUND THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS A CO - OPERATIVE BANK, THE ASSESSEE WILL NOT BE ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION AS STIPULATED U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) BUT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE IS NOT A CO - OPERATIVE BANK OTHER THAN A 7 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OR A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURA L DEVELOPMENT BANK, THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(2)(A)(I) WILL BE APPLICABLE TO THE ASSESSEE PROVIDED THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS. THIS SEC TION NOWHERE STATES CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SO CIETY EXCEPT MENTIONED UNDER PROVISO 2 TO SECTION 80P WHICH IS RELEVANT FOR SUB - CLAUSE 6 OR 7. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I). 4. IN OUR OPINION, SEC. 80P(2)(A)(I) PROVIDES TWO TYPES OF ACTIVITIES IN WHICH THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY MUST BE ENGAGED TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SUB - CLAUSE (I). THESE TWO ACTIVITIES ARE NOT ALTERNATE S ONES BECAUSE THE SECTION ALLOWS DEDUCTION TO THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY ON THE WHOLE OF PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS ATTRIBUTABLE TO ANY ONE OR MORE OF S UCH ACTIVITIES. THIS PRE - SUPPOSES THAT ELIGIBLE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY CAN CARRY ON EITHER ONE OF THESE TWO BUSINESSES OR CAN CARRY BOTH THESE BUSINESSES FOR THE MEMBERS. IF THE ASSESSEE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY CARRIES ON ONE OR BOTH OF THE ACTIVITIES, IT WILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION. THESE TWO ACTIVITIES ARE (A) CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF BANKING FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS OR (B) CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENGAGED IN PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS. BOTH THE ACTIVITIES MUST BE CARRIED ON BY THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY FOR ITS MEMBERS. IF A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN CARRYING ON THESE ACTIVITIES/FACILITIES FOR THE PERSONS OTHER THAN ITS MEMBERS, THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY, IN OUR OPINION, WILL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTIO N U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) ON THE INCOME WHICH IT DERIVES FROM CARRYING ON THE ACTIVITIES NOT RELATING TO ITS MEMBERS. THEREFORE, WHERE A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF BANKING FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS AND TO THE PUBLIC OR PROVIDING C REDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS OR TO THE PUBLIC, THE INCOME WHICH RELATES TO THE BUSINESS OF BANKING FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS WILL ONLY BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 8 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) 80P(2)(A)(I). THERE IS NO PROHIBITION U/S 80P NOT TO ALLOW DEDUCTION TO SUCH CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES IN RESPECT OF BUSINESS RELATING TO ITS MEMBERS. 4.1 NOW, THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS A CO - OPERATIVE BANK OR NOT. CO - OPERATIVE BANK IS DEFINED IN PART V OF THE BANKING REGULATIONS ACT, 1949 AS UNDER : - CO - OPERATIVE BANK MEANS A STATE CO - OPERATIVE BANK, A CENTRAL CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE BANK: 5. FROM THE DEFINITION OF CO - OPERATIVE BANK IT IS APPARENT THAT CO - OPERATIVE BANK MEANS STATE CO - OPERATIVE BANK, A CENTRAL CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE BANK. IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A STATE CO - OPERATIVE BANK OR CENTRAL CO - OPERATIVE BANK. WE HAVE THEREFORE TO FIND WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE BANK. 6. THE PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE BANK IS DEFINED UNDER SECTION 5 CLAUSE (CCV) OF BANKING REGULATION ACT 1949 AS UNDER: - (CCV) PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE BANK MEANS A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY, OTHER THAN A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY - (1) THE PRIMARY OBJECT OR PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF WHICH IS TRANSACTION OF BANKING BUSINESS: (2) THE PAID - UP SHARE CAPITAL AND RESERVES OF WHICH ARE NOT LESS THAN ONE LAKH OF RUPEES: AND (3) THE BYE - LAWS OF WHICH DO N OT PERMIT ADMISSION OF ANY OTHER CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY AS A MEMBER: PROVIDED THAT THIS SUB - CLAUSE SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE ADMISSION OF A CO - OPERATIVE BANK AS A MEMBER BY REASON OF SUCH CO - OPERATIVE BANK SUBSCRIBING TO THE SHARE CAPITAL OF SUCH CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY OUT OF FUNDS PROVIDED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSE 7. FROM THE AFORESAID DEFINITION, IT IS APPARENT THAT IF THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY COMPLIED WITH ALL THE THREE CONDITIONS; FIRSTLY THAT THE PRIMARY OBJECT OR PRINCIPLE BUSINESS TRANS ACTED BY IT IS A BANKING BUSINESS, SECONDLY, THE PAID UP SHARE CAPITAL AND RESERVE OF WHICH ARE 1 LAKH OR MORE AND THIRDLY, BY LAWS OF THE 9 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY DO NOT PERMIT ADMISSION OF ANY OTHER CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY AS A MEMBER, IT WILL BE REGARDED TO BE PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE BANK. IF CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY DOES NOT FULFIL ANY OF THE CONDITIONS, IT CANNOT BE REGARDED TO BE A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE BANK. THEREFORE, IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WE HAVE TO EXAMINE ON THE BASIS OF THE FACTS AND MATERIALS ON RECOR D WHETHER THE ASSESSEE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY COMPLIES WITH ALL THE THREE CONDITIONS. IN CASE, IT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH ALL THE THREE CONDITIONS, IT CANNOT BE REGARDED TO BE A CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(4), IN OUR OPINION, WILL NOT BE A PPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. ONCE, THE ASSESSEE WILL NOT FALL WITHIN THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(4), THE ASSESSEE, IN OUR OPINION, WILL BE ELIGIBLE TO GET DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) IN RESPECT OF WHOLE OF THE INCOME WHICH THE ASSESSEE DERIVES FRO M CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF BANKING OR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS. 8. WHETHER CONDITION NO. 1 IS APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, FOR THIS WE HAVE TO LOOK INTO THE BYE - LAWS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS CA SE ARE ENUMERATED AS UNDER : - I. TO ENCOURAGE THRIFT, SELF - HELP AND CO - OPERATION AMONG THE MEMBERS. II. AS PER BYE - LAW, EXTEND FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY MEMBERS FOR GENUINE PURPOSES BY COLLECTING FUNDS. III . TO ARRANGE PROGRAMMES TO GIVE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR SOCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF MEMBERS AND WELFARE OF THEM . IV . TO POSSESS, ACQUIRE, ALTER OR CONSTRUCT SITE / BUILDINGS ETC., FOR THE USE AND CONVINCE OF BUSINESS OF THE SOCIETY . V . CONDUCTING PROGRAMMES FOR IMPROVEMENT OF ECONOMIC CONDITIONS OF SC/ST AND WOMEN MEMBERS . VI . TO LEND LOANS FOR ITS MEMBERS ON DEPOSIT OF GOLD AND SILVER ORNAMENTS . VII . TO SANCTION LOANS TO ITS MEMBERS AGAINST THE SECURITY OF INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL PURPOSES VIII . TO GIVE FINANCIAL AND TECHNICAL ASSIST ANCE TO SMALL SCALE / COTTAGE INDUSTRIES, TRANSPORTATION AND SELF EMPLOYED PROFESSIONALS TO PROMOTE THEIR BUSINESS XI TO ENCOURAGE THE MEMBERS TO ESTABLISH TRADE AND AGRICULTURE BASE INDUSTRY OR PROVIDING PROBABLE ASSISTANCE TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL AND PROMOTE THE BUSINESS WITH THE SOCIETY . 10 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) X . WITH PRIOR PERMISSION OF THE REGISTRAR TO DO ALL OTHER ACTIVITIES WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE THE PURPOSE MENTIONED IN BYE - LAWS. XI . TO EXTEND FINANCIAL AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO THE UNEMPLOYED TO START THEIR OWN IND USTRY / PROFESSION. XII . TO SANCTION THE LOANS TO ITS MEMBERS. XIII . TO ARRANGE THE PROGRAMS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF POOR COMMUNITY. ON THE BASIS OF THESE OBJECTS WHETHER IT CAN BE SAID THAT THE PRIMARY OBJECT OR PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE IS TRANSACTION OF BANKING BUSINESS? BANKING BUSINESS HAS BEEN DEFINED U/S 5(B) OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER : ' BAN KING' MEANS THE ACCEPTING, FOR THE PURPOSE OF LENDING OR INVESTMENT, OF DEPOSITS OF MONEY FROM THE PUBLIC , REPAYABLE ON DEMAND OR OTHERWISE, AND WITHDRAWABLE BY CHEQUE, DRAFT, ORDER OR OTHERWISE . FROM THE SAID DEFINITION IT IS CLEAR THAT BANKING MEANS AC CEPTING DEPOSIT OF MONEY FROM THE PUBLIC WHICH IS REPAYABLE ON DEMAND OR OTHERWISE AND WITHDRAWAL OF THESE DEPOSITS BY CHEQUE, DRAFT, ORDER OR OTHERWISE AND THESE DEPOSITS ARE ACCEPTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF LENDING OR INVESTMENT. THESE DEPOSITS MUST BE ACCEP TED FROM THE PUBLIC, NOT ONLY FROM THE MEMBERS. THESE DEPOSITS MUST BE REPAYABLE ON DEMAND OR OTHERWISE AND COULD BE WITHDRAWN BY THE DEPOSITOR BY CHEQUE, DRAFT OR OTHERWISE. WE NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CATEGORICALLY ACCEPTED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BEL OW THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCEPTING DEPOSITS OF MONEY NOT ONLY FROM THE MEMBERS BUT ALSO FROM THE GENER AL PUBLIC WHO ARE NON - MEMBERS. THIS FACT IS CLEAR AS PER THE REMAND REPORT OF A.O DATED 08.11.2013 BEFORE THE CIT(A) CONFIRMS FROM THE FOLLOWING : - FURTHER, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THEY ACCEPT DEPOSIT FROM THE MEMBERS AS WELL AS NON - MEMBERS . THE DEPOSITS SO ACCEPTED ARE USED BY THE ASSESSEE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY FOR LENDING OR INVESTMENT. THIS FACT HAS NOT BEEN DENIED BY THE ASSESSEE OR BY HIS COUNSEL IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION MADE BEFORE US . WE HAVE ALSO NOTED FROM PART III OF THE BYE - LAWS WHICH DEALS WITH THE FUNDS OF THE SOCIETY THAT BYE - LAWS 6 11 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) CLEARLY STATES THAT THE SOCIETY CAN RAISE THE FUNDS BY ACCEPTING DEPOSITS OF VARIOUS TYPES. THIS RULE DOES NOT RESTRICT ACCEPTING OF THE DEPOSIT TO THE MEMBERS ONLY. EVEN OUT OF THE DEPOSITS SO RECEIVED, THE LOANS HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OBJECTS AS ENUMERATED ABOVE. THUS, IN OUR OPINION, CONDITION NO. 1 STANDS SATIS FIED AND IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS NOT CARRYING ON BANKING BUSINESS AS IT WAS ACCEPTING DEPOSITS FROM THE PERSONS WHO WERE NOT MEMBERS. IN THE SUBMISSION THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE TOOK THE PLEA THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT OBTAINED BANKING LICENCE. IN OUR OPINION IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY SHOULD HAVE A BANKING LICENCE AS PER THE DEFINITION UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR CARRYING ON BANKING BUSINESS . IF LICENCE IS NOT OBTAINED IT MAY BE AN ILLEGAL BANKING BUSINESS UNDER THE OTHER STATUTE . WHAT WE HAVE TO SEE WHETHER THE NATURE OF THE BUSINESS CARRYING ON BY THE ASSESSEE IS A BANKING BUSINESS OR NOT. THE INCOME TAX IN OUR OPINION IS NOT CONCERNED WHETHE R THE BANKING BUSINESS CARRIED ON BY THE ASSESSEE IS LEGAL OR ILLEGAL. THE INCOME HAS TO BE ASSESSED U/S 14 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT UNDER THE SAME HEAD EVEN IF THE NATURE OF THE BUSINESS IS ILLEGAL. IF WE LOOK INTO CHAPTER III OF THE BYE - LAWS WHICH CONSISTS OF FUND OF THE SOCIETY, WE NOTED THAT THE TYPES OF THE DEPOSITS WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS ACCEPTED AS PER BYE - LAWS 7 ARE THE SAME AS ARE BEING ACCEPTED DURING THE COURSE OF THE CARRYING OUT THE BANKING ACTIVITIES. SO FAR AS THE SECOND CONDITION IS CONCERNED, THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE PAID UP SHARE CAPITAL AND RESERVES IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS MORE THAN RS. 1 LAC. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE SATISFIES THE SECOND CONDITION. SO FAR AS THE THIRD CONDITION IS CONCERNED, WE NOTED THAT SEC. 16 OF THE KARNATAK A STATE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959 PERMITS ADMISSION OF ANY OTHER CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY AS A MEMBER. THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 16 ARE LAID DOWN AS UNDER : 16. PERSONS WHO MAY BECOME MEMBERS - [(1) SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 17, NO PERSON SHAL L BE ADMITTED AS A MEMBER OF A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING, NAMELY: -- [(A) AN INDIVIDUAL WHO NEEDS THE SERVICES OF SUCH CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY [AND IS RESIDING IN THE AREA OF THE OPERATION OF THE SOCIETY] AND IS COMPETENT TO 12 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) ENTER INTO CONTRACT UNDER THE CONTRACT ACT, 1872 (CENTRAL ACT IX OF 1872);] [(A - 1) A DEPOSITOR;] (B) ANY OTHER CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY; (C) THE STATE GOVERNMENT OR THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT; (D) THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION AND SUCH OTHER INSTITUTIONS AS MAY BE APPROVED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT; (E) A FIRM, A COMPANY OR ANY OTHER BODY CORPORATE CONSTITUTED UNDER ANY LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE INCLUDING A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1960 (KARNATAKA ACT 17 OF 1960); (F) A MARKET COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED UNDER THE KARNATAKA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING (REGULATION) ACT, 1966 (KARNATAKA ACT 27 OF 1966); (G) A LOCAL AUTHORITY. EXPLANATION. - FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS CLAUSE, LOCAL AUTHORITY MEANS, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, TOWN PANCHAYAT, ZILLA PANCHAYAT, TALUK PANCHAYAT OR GRAMA PANCHAYAT CONSTITUTED UNDER ANY LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE] (2) NO CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY SHALL, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, REFUSE ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP TO ANY PERSON DULY QUALIFIED THEREFOR E UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS [ACT, RULES AND BYE - LAWS] THE AFORESAID PROVISION OF SEC. 16 MANDATES ADMISSION OF ANY OTHER CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY A S A MEMBER OF THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. THE WORD USED IN SEC. 16(1) IS SHALL. THIS FACT IS CLARIFIED FURTHER BY SUB - SECTION (2) AS RE - PRODUCED HEREINABOVE THAT NO CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY SHALL REFUSE ADMISSION TO THE MEMBERSHIP, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT REASON, TO ANY PERSON WHO IS QUALIFIED TO BECOME MEMBER UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT, RULES AND BYE - LAWS. THIS CLEARLY PROVES THAT IN CASE THE RULES AND BYE - LAWS OF THE OTHER CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY PROVIDES OTHERWISE, THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY MAY NOT BE ADMITT ED AS A MEMBER OF THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. THE PERSON, AS PER SUB - SECTION (2), MUST BE QUALIFIED FOR BECOMING MEMBER NOT ONLY U/S 16(1) BUT ALSO AS PER THE RULES AND BYE - LAWS OF THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. WE CANNOT READ SUB - SECTION (2) IN THE MANNER THAT THE RULES AND BYE - LAWS CANNOT PERMIT THE ADMISSION OF ANY OTHER CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY AS A MEMBER OF THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. HAD THAT BEEN THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE, THEY WOULD HAVE NOT USED THE WORDS THIS ACT, RULES AND BYE - LAWS IN SUB - SECTION (2). 13 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) 9. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE BYE - LAWS WHICH CONTAINS THE MEMBERSHIP WHICH IS BYE - LAWS NO.17. IT STATES AS UNDER : - 17. QUALIFICATION OF MEMBERSHIP :AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS 18 YEARS OF AGE CAN ENTER INTO A LEGAL CONTRACT AS PER THE SECTION 11 OF THE IN DIAN CONTRACT ACT 1871. CONDITION FOR COMPLETING 18 YEARS OF AGE CANNOT BE IMPOSED FOR CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. THIS CONDITION CAN BE APPLIED ONLY TO AN INDIVIDUAL. FROM THIS, IT IS APPARENT THAT THE BYE - LAWS OF SOCIETY DOES NOT PERMIT THE ADMISSION OF ANY OTHER CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY AS MEMBER. THUS THE THIRD CONDITION FOR BECOMING PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE BANK IS ALSO COMPLIED WITH. SINCE THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY COMPLIES WITH ALL THE THREE CONDITIONS , THEREFORE , IN OUR OPINION THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY BECOMES A PRI MARY CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND IN VIEW OF EXPLANATION (A) OF SECTION 80P(4) IT HAS TO BE REGARDED AS A CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND IS HIT BY SECTION 80P(4). 10. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE DECISION OF THE HYDERABAD BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF THE CITIZEN COOPERATIVE SOCIETY VS. ADDL. CIT ( SUPRA ). WE NOTED THAT THIS DECISION IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE BEFORE US. IN THIS DECISION, UNDER PARA 23 THE TRIBUNAL HAS GIVEN A FINDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ON BANKING BUSINESS AND FOR ALL PR ACTICAL PURPOSES IT ACTS LIKE A CO - OPERATIVE BANK. THE SOCIETY IS GOVERNED BY THE BANKING REGULATIONS ACT. THEREFORE, THE SOCIETY BEING A CO - OPERATIVE BANK PROVIDING BANKING FACILITIES TO MEMBERS IS NOT ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) AFTER THE INTRODUCTION OF SUB - SECTION (4) TO SECTION 80P. IN VIEW OF THIS FINDING, THE ASSESSEE WAS DENIED DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I). WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE DECISION OF THE BANGALORE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. DIVYAJYOTHI CREDIT CO - OP ERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. ( SUPRA ) IN ITA NO. 72/BANG/2013. IN THIS CASE, WE NOTED THAT THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ACIT, CIRCLE 3(1), 14 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) BANGALORE VS. M/S. BANGALORE COMMERCIAL TRANSPORT CREDIT CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. IN ITA NO. 1069/BANG/2010 HOLDING THAT SEC. 80P(2)(A)(I) IS APPLICABLE ONLY TO CREDIT CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY A AND NOT TO CO - OPERATIVE BANK. WITH DUE REGARDS TO THE BENCH, WE ARE UNABLE TO FIND ANY TERM CREDIT CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OR U/S 80P(4), THEREFORE, THIS DECISION CANNOT ASSIST US. WE NOTED THAT THE HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. JAFARI MOMIN VIKAS CO - OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. IN TAX APPEALS NO. 442 OF 2013, 443 OF 2013 AND 863 OF 2 013 ( SUPRA ) VIDE ORDER DT. 15.1.2014 TOOK THE VIEW THAT SEC. 80P(4) WILL NOT APPLY TO A SOCIETY WHICH IS NOT A CO - OPERATIVE BANK. IN THE CASE OF VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARA SANGHA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. ( SUPRA) WE NOTED THAT THE ISSUE BEFORE THE HON'BL E HIGH COURT IN THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER RELATED TO THE LEGISLATIVE COMPETENCE OF THE STATE LEGISLATURE FOR ISSUING A CIRCULAR. THE ISSUE DOES NOT RELATE TO THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I). WHILE DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE, THE HON' BLE HIGH COURT UNDER PARA 12 OBSERVED AS UNDER : - 12. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO ACCEPT THIS CONTENTION. THE PETITIONERS ARE NOT THE BANKING INSTITUTIONS COMING UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT. THEY ARE THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES REGISTERED UNDER THE ACT, AND AS SUCH THEY ARE GOVERNED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT PASSED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE. CONSEQUENTLY, THE STATE GOVERNMENT HAS CONTROL OVER THEM TO THE EXTENT THE ACT PERMITS. MAJOR ACTIVITIES OF THE PETITIONERS ARE TO FINANCE ITS MEMB ERS. FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING ITS MEMBERS, THEY BORROW MONEY FROM THE FINANCING AGENCIES AND REPAY THE SAME. MERELY BECAUSE THE PETITIONERS - THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES IN QUESTION - ARE REQUIRED TO ADVANCE LOANS TO THEIR MEMBERS, THEY DO NOT CEASE TO BE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES GOVERNED BY THE ACT NOR CAN THEY BE TREATED AS BANKING COMPANIES. IT IS ALSO NOT POSSIBLE TO HOLD THAT THESE ACTIVITIES OF THE PETITIONERS AMOUNT TO BANKING AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949, INASMUCH AS THES E CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ARE NOT ESTABLISHED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DOING BANKING AS DEFINED IN SECTION 5(B) OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949. THIS DECISION, IN OUR OPINION, IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE CASE BEFORE US BECAUSE THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(2)(A)(I), AS WE HAVE ALREADY HELD IN THE PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS, ARE APPLICABLE TO A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY WHICH IS ENGAGED 15 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) IN CARRYING ON BANKING BUSINESS FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS IF IT IS NOT A CO - OPERATIVE BANK. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE DECISION OF THIS BENCH IN THE CASE OF DCIT VS. JAYALAKSHMI MAHILA VIVIDODESHAGALA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LTD. I N ITA NO. 1 TO 3/PNJ/2012 DT. 30.3.2012 ( SUPRA), FOR WHICH THE UNDERSIGNED IS THE AUTHOR. WHILE DISCUSSING THIS ISSUE, AFTER ANALYSING THE AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY UNDER PARA 12 OF ITS ORDER, THIS TRIBUNAL HAS HELD AS UNDER : - 12. FROM THE AFORESAID OBJECTS, IT IS APPARENT THAT NONE OF THE AIMS AND OBJECTS ALLOWS THE ASSESSEE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY TO ACCEPT DEPOSITS OF MONEY FROM PUBLIC FO R THE PURPOSE OF LENDING OR INVESTMENT. IN OUR OPINION UNTIL AND UNLESS THAT CONDITION IS SATISFIED, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE PRIME OBJECT OR PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE IS BANKING BUSINESS. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WILL NOT COMPLY WITH THE FIRST C ONDITION AS LAID DOWN IN THE DEFINITION AS GIVEN U/S. 5(CCV) OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1959 FOR BECOMING PRIMARY COOPERATIVE BANK. THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, CANNOT BE REGARDED TO BE PRIMARY COOPERATIVE BANK AND IN CONSEQUENCE THEREOF, IT CANNOT BE A CO - OPERATIVE BANK AS DEFINED UNDER PART V OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT 1949. ACCORDINGLY, IN OUR OPINION THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P (4) READ WITH EXPLANATION THERE UNDER WILL NOT BE APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, IN OU R OPINION WILL BE ENTITLED FOR THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I). WE ACCORDINGLY CONFIRM THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ALLOWING DEDUCTION TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE DECISION OF ACIT VS PALHAWAS PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, 23 TAXMAN.COM 318 (DELHI). SECTION 80P(4) CLEARLY EXCLUDES PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CREDIT SOCIETY FROM ITS DOMAIN. THEREFORE THIS DECISION WILL NOT ASSIST THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE DECISION OF PUNE BENCH IN THE CASE OF ITO VS JANKALYAN NAGRI SAHAKARI PAD SANSTHA LTD, 24 TAXMAN.COM 127 PUNE. THIS WE HAVE ALREADY STATED THAT SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) NOWHERE TALKS OF CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY AND THEREFORE THE DISTINCTION MADE UNDER THE BANKING REG ULATION ACT CANNOT BE IMPORTED U/S 80P(2)(A)(I). THIS DECISION IN OUR OPINION WILL NOT ASSIST THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE DECISION OF TARANI MAHILA CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD TO WHICH THE UNDERSIGNED IS THE AUTHOR SIMILAR FINDING AS HA S BEEN GIVEN IN THIS ARE GIVEN IN THAT CASE ALSO. 16 ITA NOS.430&445/PNJ/2013 (ASST. YEARS: 2009 - 10 & 2010 - 11) 11. WE, THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF OUR AFORESAID DISCUSSION HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TO BE REGARDED TO BE A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE BANK AS ALL THE THREE BASIC CONDITIONS ARE COMPLIED WITH, THEREFORE, IT IS A CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(4) ARE APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AND ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I). WE, THEREFORE, CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) NOT ALLOWING DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) TO THE ASSE SSEE. 12 . IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. 13 . ORDER PRONOUN CED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 .03.2014. SD/ - SD/ - (D .T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER (P.K. BANSAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE : PANAJI / GOA DATED : 21 .03.2014 *A* COPY TO : (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT CONCERNED (4) CIT(A) CONCERNED (5) D.R (6) GUARD FILE TRUE COPY, BY ORDER SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, PANAJI, GOA