INCOME TAX OFFICER-24(1)(4), MUMBAI V. CITISCAPE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 5437/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6150 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 23-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIRAMA KARTIKEYAN
• Section: 80P

Judgement Text

, ,, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUM BAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO.5437/MUM/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2014-2015) ITO-24(1)(4), MUMBAI-400012 VS. M/S CITISCAPE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED, GROUND FLOOR, SOCIETY OFFICE, ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI(EAST), MUMBAI-400059 ./PAN NO. : AAAAC 4160 G ( /APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) /REVENUE BY : SHRI ABHIRAMA KARTIKEYAN, DR /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI GAURAV KABRA, AR / DATE OF HEARING : 07/01/2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 15/01/2019 / O R D E R PER SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM : THIS APPEAL BY REVENUE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF T HE CIT(A) 36, MUMBAI, DATED 12.06.2017, WHICH IN TURN HAS ARISEN OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 143(3)/147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) RELATIN G TO A.Y. 2014-2015. 2. THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THE PRESENT A PPEAL IS AGAINST THE DIRECTION OF CIT(A) TO THE AO TO ALLOW DEDUCTIO N U/S.80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT OF RS.65,89,133/- WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED INTEREST FROM INVESTMENT WITH COOPERATIVE BA NKS. SECONDLY, THE REVENUE RAISED A GRIEVANCE THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED I N NOT CONSIDERING THE INSERTED SECTION 80P(4) OF THE ACT, WHICH SPECIFICA LLY PROVIDES THAT THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY IN RELATION TO ANY CO-OPERA TIVE BANK OTHER THAN A ITA NO.5437/17 2 PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OR PRIMARY CO-O PERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. 3. FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A COOPER ATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY AND DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION DECLARED IN COME UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. DURING THE YEAR THE ASSE SSEE EARNED INTEREST TO THE TUNE OF RS.65,89,133/- FROM THE COOPERATIV E BANKS AND, THUS, CLAIMED DEDUCTION THEREON U/S.80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT WHICH ACCORDING TO AO IS NOT PERMISSIBLE AND ACCORDINGLY THE AO ISSUED SH OW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 25.11.2016, WHICH WA S REPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE AND FINALLY THE AO NOT FINDING THE REPLY O F THE ASSESSEE AS TENABLE, ADDED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESS EE BY FRAMING ASSESSMENT U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 1 3.12.2016. 4. THE CIT(A) IN APPEAL, DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE B Y FOLLOWING THE ORDERS OF EARLIER YEARS PASSED BY THE PREDECESSORS IN WHICH DEDUCTION U/S.80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT WAS ALLOWED. 5. AT THE OUTSET, LD. AR SUBMITTED BEFORE THE BENCH THAT ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT CASE IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR O F THE ASSESSEE IN HIS OWN CASE IN ITA NO.7154/MUM/2016, ORDER DATED 09.05 .2018, A.Y. 2013- 2014, WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO EXEMPTION U/S.80P( 2)(D) OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT COOPERATIVE BANK IS ALSO A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY. 6. LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED ON THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND ORDER OF AO. ITA NO.5437/17 3 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD INCLUDING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE PASSED IN ITA NO.7154/MUM/2016, ORDER DATED 09.05.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-2014. WE OB SERVE THAT THE ISSUE HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN T HE AFORESAID CASE. THE OPERATIVE PART OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ABOVE CASE IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER :- 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES FO R BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIE S AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CON SIDERATION TO THE ISSUE BEFORE US AND ARE PERSUADED TO BE IN AGRE EMENT WITH THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE CIT(A) THAT AS A CO-OPERATIVE BAN K IS ALWAYS REGISTERED UNDER THE RELEVANT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIE S ACT OF THE RELEVANT STATE, THEREFORE, THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U NDER SEC. 80P(2)(D) ON THE INTEREST INCOME OF RS.67,43,445/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE CO-OPERATIVE BANK WAS WELL IN ORD ER. RATHER, IN THIS REGARD IT WOULD BE RELEVANT TO OBSERVE THAT SE C. 2(19) DEFINING A 'CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY' CATEGORICALLY TAKES WITHIN ITS SWEEP A CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1992 (2 OF 1912) OR UNDER ANY OTHER LAW FOR THE TIM E BEING IN FORCE IN ANY STATE FOR THE REGISTRATION OF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES. WE THUS ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT AS A CO-OPERATIVE B ANK IS A CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY, THEREFORE, THE CIT(A) HAD RIGHTL Y CONCLUDED THAT THE INTEREST INCOME OF RS.67,43,445/- RECEIVED BY T HE ASSESSEE FROM THE CO-OPERATIVE BANK WOULD DULY BE ENTITLED F OR CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SEC. 80P(2)(D) OF THE ACT. SINCE THE FACTS BEFORE US ADMITTEDLY SAME TO THE FA CTS IN THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE AS CITED ABOVE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-2014, WE, THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME, UPHOLD THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE APPEAL OF REVENUE. 8. IN GROUND NO.2, THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN NOT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT SECTION 80P (4) OF THE ACT PROVIDES THAT THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY IN RELATION TO AN Y CO-OPERATIVE BANK OTHER ITA NO.5437/17 4 THAN A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OR PRIMA RY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. 9. SINCE THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS A LREADY HELD THAT COOPERATIVE BANK IS ALSO COOPERATIVE SOCIETY AND, T HEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE. IN OUR VIEW, A COOPERATIVE BANK IS FIRST REGISTERED AS COOPERATIVE SOCIETY AND THEN AFTER LICENCE OF THE RBI, FINANCIAL AND BANKING ACTIVITIE S ARE CARRIED ON. IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE HAVE ALREADY HELD THAT THE COOPERA TIVE SOCIETY ALSO INCLUDES COOPERATIVE BANKS. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUN D OF REVENUE IS ALSO DISMISSED AS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE ABOVE CITED DE CISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL. 10. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15/01/2019. SD/- (RAM LAL NEGI) SD/- (RAJESH KUMAR) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED 15/01/2019 . . /PRAKASH KUMAR MISHRA , SR.PS. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, ( ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ) , / ITAT, MUMBAI 1. / THE APPELLANT- 2. / THE RESPONDENT- 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A), MUMBAI 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//