The Primary Co-operative Agricultural & Rural Development Bank Limited, Sullia V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Puttur

ITA 468/BANG/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7800 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 02-09-2021
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYADARSHI MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: A.RAVISH RAO
• Keywords: Business income; Source of fund; Set aside
• Section: 56; 80P

Judgement Text

ITA NO.468/BANG/2020 THE PRIMARY CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., SULLIA IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BBENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.468/BANG/2020 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2016-17 THE PRIMARY CO-OP. AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. NEAR KSRTC BUS STAND SULLIA KARNATAKA PAN NO : AAALT0052B VS. ITO WARD-1 PUTTUR APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI A. RAVISH RAO, A.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PRIYADARSHI MISHRA, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 02.09.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.09.2021 O R D E R PERB.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 06.01.2020 PASSED BY LD CIT(A), MANGALURU AND IT RE LATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-17. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER:- 1. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN DISALLOW ING THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED BY THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY OF RS.77,39,885/ - UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) AND THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHOR ITY HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY. 2. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN TREATING THE SUM OF RS.21,88,166/-BEING THE INTEREST RECEIVED FROM SCDC C BANK AS INCOME ITA NO.468/BANG/2020 THE PRIMARY CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., SULLIA PAGE 2 OF 8 FROM OTHER SOURCES, WHICH THE APPELLANT HAD INCLUDE D UNDER INCOME FROM BUSINESS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN NOT GR ANTING THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D) FOR THE INTEREST RECEIVED F ROM CO-OPERATIVE BANKS 3. THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS REGISTERED UNDER THE CO-OPE RATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959 AND COMPLIED WITH THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE S OCIETIES ACT, 1959, THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES RULES, 1960 AN D BYE LAWS OF THE SOCIETY AS WELL. THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETI ES ACT, 1959 FOR THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL PERMITS TO DO THE TRANSACTION WIT H ORDINARY MEMBERS, ASSOCIATE MEMBERS AND NOMINAL MEMBERS. HENCE ALL TH E BORROWERS ARE MEMBERS (REGULAR OR ASSOCIATE OR NOMINAL) OF THE AP PELLANT SOCIETY AND WE ARE CONDUCTING THE BUSINESS WITH THE ABOVE CATEGORY OF MEMBERS AND NOT WITH THE GENERAL PUBLIC AS OBSERVED BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER. SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) AND MUTUALITY CONCEPT ARE NOT INTER RELATED. MUTUALITY CONCEPT IS NOT MANDATORY TO CLAIM THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I). 4. DURING THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY R ECEIVED INTEREST ON DEPOSITS OF Z. 21,88,166/- FROM CO OPERATIVE BANKS AND CLAIM ED DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I). HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER RELIED ON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH IN THE CASE O F M/S TOTAGARS CO- OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY. HOWEVER OUR CASE IS NOT SIMILAR TO THE ABOVE CASE, AND THE ASSESSE IS A CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY HENCE ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(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 SO CIETY. 5. WE FURTHER SUBMIT THAT, AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SE CTION 80(P)(2)(A)(I), IN THE CASE OF A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, THE WHOLE OF TH E AMOUNT OF PROFITS AND GAINS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING CRE DIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS SHALL BE ALLOWED AS FULL DEDUCTION. IF ANY ACTIVITY IS CARRIED ON WITH NON MEMBERS AS ALLEGED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R AND CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THE PROFIT ATTRI BUTABLE TO SUCH BUSINESS CAN ONLY BE TAXED. THEREFORE IN THE CASE OF THE APP ELLANT IF NOMINAL MEMBERS ARE NOT CONSIDERED AS MEMBERS AS ALLEGED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ONLY SUCH PORTION OF PROFIT ATTRIBUTABLE T O THE BUSINESS WITH NOMINAL MEMBERS COULD BE TAXED. 6. THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN ASSESSED AS A CO-OPERATIV E SOCIETY AND SUCH BEING THE CASE ALL BENEFITS AVAILABLE TO THE APPELLANT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P OF THE INCOME TAX ACT CANNOT BE DENIED WITHOUT A LEGAL ITA NO.468/BANG/2020 THE PRIMARY CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., SULLIA PAGE 3 OF 8 PROVISION TO DO SO. THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AU THORITY HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THIS WHILE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL. 7. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, TO AMEND AND/ OR ALTER ANY OF THE FOREGOING GROUNDS AND SUCH OTHER GROUNDS AS MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE APPELLANT PRAYS FOR ALLOWING THE DEDUC TION U/S 80P(2)(I) & 80P(2)(D). 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIET Y REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT AND DECLARED TOTAL INCOME OF RS.4,06,730/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS HAVING NOMINAL/ASSOCIATE MEMBERS AND ACCORDINGLY TO OK THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS VIOLATED THE PRINCIPLES OF MU TUALITY. ACCORDINGLY, TAKING SUPPORT OF THE DECISION RENDERE D BY HYDERABAD BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CITIZENS CO-OPERAT IVE BANK, THE AO HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTIO N U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. 3. THE AO ALSO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EA RNED INTEREST INCOME FROM DEPOSITS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.21,88,166/ - AND IT HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) FOR THIS AMOUNT ALSO. THE AO TOOK THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD HAVE OFFERED THE ABOVE SAID INTEREST INCOME UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SO URCES. ACCORDINGLY, TAKING SUPPORT OF THE DECISION RENDERE D BY HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF THE TOTAGARS CO -OPERATIVE SOCIETY (ITA NO.100066 OF 2016 DATED 16.6.2017), TH E A.O. HELD THAT HE IS BRINGING THE INTEREST INCOME TO TAX U/S 56 OF THE ACT UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE A.O . FURTHER HELD THAT THE ABOVE SAID INCOME IS NOT ALLOWABLE AS DEDU CTION U/S 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT AS PER THE ABOVE SAID DECISION AND ACCORDINGLY DID NOT ALLOW DEDUCTION FOR INTEREST INCOME U/S 80P (2)(D) AND ITA NO.468/BANG/2020 THE PRIMARY CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., SULLIA PAGE 4 OF 8 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER PASSED BY A.O. 4. THE GROUND NOS.1, 6 AND 7 URGED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE GENERAL IN NATURE. 5. GROUND NO.3 TO 5 RELATE TO DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE ENTIRE ISSUE REQUIRES RE- EXAMINATION IN THE LIGHT OF DECISION RENDERED BY HO NBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF MAVILAYI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. AND OTHERS (2021) 431 ITR 1. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE COO RDINATE BENCHES HAS RESTORED AN IDENTICAL ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. IN MANY CASES FOR EXAMINING THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S 80P(2)(A)(I ) OF THE ACT IN THE LIGHT OF DECISION RENDERED BY HONBLE SUPREME C OURT IN THE CASE OF MAVILAYI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. 6. WE HEARD LD. D.R. AND PERUSED THE RECORD. SINC E THE ISSUE OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT REQUIRES F RESH EXAMINATION IN THE LIGHT OF DECISION RENDERED BY HONBLE SUPREME C OURT IN THE CASE OF MAVILAYI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. (SUPRA) , WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND RESTOR E THE SAME TO THE FILE OF THE A.O FOR EXAMINING IT AFRESH AS DISCUSS ED ABOVE. 7. GROUND NO.2 RELATE TO DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S 80P( 2)(D) OF THE ACT. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS R EQUIRED TO MAINTAIN DEPOSITS WITH BANKS TO MEET THE REQUIREMEN T OF STATUTORY LIQUIDITY RATIO (SLR), WHICH IS 28% OF TOTAL DEPOSI TS. SINCE THESE DEPOSITS HAVE BEEN MADE UNDER LEGAL OBLIGATION, IT IS INCIDENTAL ACTIVITY OF BUSINESS INTRICATELY CONNECTED WITH THE MAIN BUSINESS OF PROVIDING CREDIT TO THE MEMBERS. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE SLR DEPOSITS STAND AT RS.1,63,35,337/-. ACCORDINGLY, HE SUBMITTED ITA NO.468/BANG/2020 THE PRIMARY CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., SULLIA PAGE 5 OF 8 THAT THE INTEREST EARNED ON DEPOSITS KEPT AS SLR IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. 8. THE LD A.R ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D) IS BEING RESTORED TO THE FILE OF A.O. BY THE BANGALORE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL WITH CERTAIN DIRECTIONS AND ACCORDINGLY PRAYED THAT THIS ISSUE MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE A.O FOR EX AMINING AFRESH BY CONSIDERING ALL THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. 9. WE HEARD LD. D.R. AND PERUSED THE RECORD. WE NO TICE THAT AN IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE A.O . BY THE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF THANNIRUPANTHA PRIMARY AGRICUL TURAL CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. VS. ITO WITH THE FOLLOWI NG OBSERVATIONS: 9.1 AS REGARDS THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D ) OF THE I.T.ACT, THE BANGALORE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. THE JAYANAGAR CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA), ON IDENTICAL FACTS, HAD RESTORED THE ISSUE TO THE FILES OF THE A.O. FOR DE NOVO CONSIDERATION. THE NA RRATION OF FACTS, CONTENTIONS AND THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S .THE JAYANAGAR CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA) READS AS FOLLOW:- 4. THE ISSUES THAT ARISE FOR CONSIDERATION IN THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS TO WHETHER THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES WERE JUST IFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTI ON UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) ON INTEREST INCOME EARNED AND UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF THE AC T IN RESPECT OF INTEREST RECEIVED FROM CO-OPERATIVE INSTITUTIONS. T HE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) DENIED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY MAKING INVESTMENT OF SURPLUS FUNDS HAS TO BE ASSESSED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND NOT INCOME FRO M BUSINESS AND SINCE INTEREST INCOME IS NOT ASSESSED AS BUSINESS I NCOME, THE CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 57 OF THE ACT CANNOT BE ALL OWED. IN UPHOLDING THE ABOVE CONCLUSIONS, THE CIT(A), INTER ALIA, RELIED O N THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF THE TOTGARS C O-OPERATIVE SALES SOCIETY LTD., VS. ITO 322 ITR 283 (SC) WHEREIN THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECT ION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT IS ONLY ON INCOME WHICH IS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM BUSINESS. INTEREST EARNED ON INVESTMENT OF SURPLUS FUNDS NOT IMMEDIATELY REQUIRED IN SHORT TERM DEPOSITS AND SECURITIES BY A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ITA NO.468/BANG/2020 THE PRIMARY CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., SULLIA PAGE 6 OF 8 PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO MEMBERS OR MARKETING AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE TO MEMBERS IS NOT BUSINESS INCOME BUT INCOME FROM O THER SOURCES AND THE SOCIETY IS NOT ENTITLED TO SPECIAL DEDUCTION. 5. WHILE LEARNED AR RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE H ONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF TUMUKUR MERCHANTS SOUHARDA CRE DIT CO-OPERATIVE LTD., 230 TAXMAN 309 (KARN), THE DR RELIED ON A SUB SEQUENT DECISION OF THE HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PCI T VS. TOTGARS COOPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD., 395 ITR 611 (KARN.). WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE SAID JUDGMENT. THE FACTS OF THE CA SE BEFORE THE HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT WAS THAT THE HONBLE COURT WAS CONSIDERING A CASE RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 TO 2011-12. IN CASE DECIDED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF THE VERY SAME ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSMENT YEARS INVOLVED WAS ASSESSMENT YEARS 1991 -92 TO 1999-2000. THE NATURE OF INTEREST INCOME FOR ALL THE ASSESSMEN T YEARS WAS IDENTICAL. THE BONE OF CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IN AY 2007-0 8 TO 2011-12 WAS THAT THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2) OF THE ACT IS CL AIMED BY THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT AND NOT UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A) OF THE ACT WHICH WAS THE CLAIM IN AY 1991 -92 TO 1999- 2000. THE REASON GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT IN AY 200 7-08 TO 2011-12 INVESTMENTS AND DEPOSITS AFTER THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE TOTGAR'S CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. (S UPRA), WERE SHIFTED FROM SCHEDULE BANKS TO COOPERATIVE BANK. U/S.80P(2) (D) OF THE ACT, INCOME BY WAY OF INTEREST OR DIVIDENDS DERIVED BY A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY FROM ITS INVESTMENTS WITH ANY OTHER CO-OPERATIVE SO CIETY IS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION OF THE WHOLE OF SUCH INTEREST OR DIVIDEND INCOME. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT CO-OPERATIVE BANK IS ESSENTIA LLY A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY AND THEREFORE DEDUCTION HAS TO BE ALLOWED U NDER CLAUSE (D) OF SEC.80P(2) OF THE ACT. THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH C OURT FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT IN THE TOTGARS CO-OPE RATIVE SALES SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA) AND HELD THAT INTEREST EARNED FROM SCH EDULE BANK OR COOPERATIVE BANK IS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOM E FROM OTHER SOURCES AND THEREFORE THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.80P(2)(D)OF THE ACT WAS NOT APPLICABLE TO SUCH INTEREST INCOME. IT IS THUS CLEAR THAT THE SOURCE OF FUNDS OUT OF WHICH INVESTMENTS WERE MADE REMAINED THE SAME IN AY 2007-08 TO 2011- 12 AND IN AY 1991-92 TO 1999-2000 DECIDED BY THE HO N'BLE SUPREME COURT. THEREFORE WHETHER THE SOURCE OF FUNDS WERE A SSESSEE'S OWN FUNDS OR OUT OF LIABILITY WAS NOT SUBJECT MATTER OF THE D ECISION OF THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE DECISION CITED BY THE L EARNED DR. TO THIS EXTENT THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH C OURT IN THE CASE OF TUMUKUR MERCHANTS SOUHARDA CO-OPERATIVE LTD. (SUPRA ) STILL HOLDS GOOD. HENCE, ON THIS ASPECT, THE ISSUE SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE AO FOR A FRESH DECISION AFTER EXAMINING THE FACTS IN THE LIG HT OF THESE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF THE TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA) AND OF HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF TUMUKUR MERCHANTS SOUHARDA CO-OPERAT IVE LTD. (SUPRA). ITA NO.468/BANG/2020 THE PRIMARY CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., SULLIA PAGE 7 OF 8 9.2 IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL , WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE ON THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASE, TO RESTORE THE ISSUE OF CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D) OF THE I.T.ACT TO THE FILES OF THE A.O. H ENCE GROUND NOS.6 AND 7 ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. FOLLOWING THE ABOVE SAID DECISION WE RESTORE THIS I SSUE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR EXAMINING IT AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF D ISCUSSIONS MADE (SUPRA). 10. THE LD A.R ALSO PUT UP AN ALTERNATIVE CLAIM THA T THE EXPENSES INCURRED TO EARN THE INTEREST INCOME SHOULD BE ALLO WED U/S 57(III) OF THE ACT, IF IT CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OR 80P(2)(D) IS NOT ALLOWED. SINCE WE HAVE ALREADY RESTORED THE ISSUE OF CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT, WE RESTORE THIS ALTERNATIVE CONTENTION ALSO TO THE FILE OF THE A.O., SINCE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE GETS SUPPORT FROM THE DECISION RENDERED BY HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN THE CASE OF TOTGARS CO-OPERAT IVE SALES SOCIETY LTD.VS. ITO (2015) 58 TAXMANN.COM 35. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TR EATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND SEPT 2021 SD/- (BEENA PILLAI) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (B.R. BASKARAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED 2 ND SEPT, 2021. VG/SPS ITA NO.468/BANG/2020 THE PRIMARY CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., SULLIA PAGE 8 OF 8 COPY TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE.