M/s.Beypore Service Co-op Bank Ltd, Calicut V. The ITO, Calicut

ITA 591/COCH/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8587 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 01-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHANTOM BOSE
• Assessee Lawyers: C B M WARRIER
• Keywords: Question of law; Competent authority

Judgement Text

ITA NO . 591/C/2014 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPEL L A TE T R IBUNAL COCHIN BENCH , COCHIN BEFORE S/SH RI B P JAIN , A M & G EORGE GEORGE.K , J M ITA NO . 591/COCH/2014 ( A SST YEAR 2011 - 12 ) M/S BEYPOE SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK, ARAKKINAR KOZHIKODE VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD1(3), KOZHIKOD E ( APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AAAAB 5233D ASSESSEE BY SH C B M WARRIER REVENUE BY SH SHANTOM BOSE, CIT - DR DATE OF HEARING 1 ST UNE 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 2 ND JUNE 2016 OR D ER PER GEORGE GEORGE. K. J M: THIS APPEAL, AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 24 TH OCT 2014. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2011 - 12. 2 THE SOLITARY ISSUE THAT WAS ARGUED IS WHETHER THE CIT(A) IS JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN DENYING THE DEDUCTION U/ S 80P(2) OF THE ACT. 3 BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS FOLLOWS: THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KERALA COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1969. IT IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING AGRICULTURAL CREDIT TO ITS MEMBERS. THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P (2) WAS DENIED ITA NO . 591/C/2014 2 BY THE AO FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE IS PRIMARILY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BANKING AND IN VIEW OF SECTION 80P(4) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2) OF THE ACT. THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE AO WAS CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A). 4 THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE LD AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS NOW COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE RECENT JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF THE CHIRAKKAL SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD & OTHERS IN ITA NO.212 OF 2013 ( JUDGMENT DATED 15 TH FEBRUARY 2016). 4.1 THE LD DR WAS UNABLE TO CONTROVERT THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. 5 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUS ED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD.. THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF THE CHIRAKKAL SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD & OTHERS (SUPRA) HAS HELD THAT THE PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KERALA COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1969 I S ENTITLED TO THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2). THE HONBLE HIGH COURT WAS CONSIDERING THE FOLLOWING SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW: A) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE TRIBUNAL IS CORRECT IN LAW IN DECIDI NG AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, THE ISSUE REGARDING ENTITLEMENT FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 80P, IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY? ITA NO . 591/C/2014 3 5.1 IN CONSIDERING THE ABOVE QUESTION OF LAW, THE HONBLE HIGH COURT RENDERED THE FOLLO WING FINDINGS: 15. APPELLANTS IN THESE DIFFERENT APPEALS ARE INDISPUTABLY SOCIETIES REGISTERED UNDER THE KERALA CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1969, FOR SORT, KCS ACT AND THE BYE - LAWS OF EACH OF THEM, AS MADE AVAILABLE TO THIS COURT AS PART OF THE PAPER BOOK S, CLEARLY SHOW THAT THEY HAVE BEEN CLASSIFIED AS PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETIES BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THAT ACT. THE PARLIAMENT, HAVING DEFINED THE TERM 'CO - OPERATI VE SOCIETY' FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE BR ACT WI TH REFERENC E TO, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE REGISTRATION OF A SOCIETY U N DER ANY STATE LAW RELATING TO CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES FOR THE TIME BEING; IT CANNOT BUT BE TAKEN THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE SOCIETIES SO REGISTERED UNDER THE STATE LAW AND ITS OBJECTS HAVE TO BE UNDERS TOOD AS THOSE WHICH HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER SUCH STATE LAW. THIS, WE VISUALISE AS DUE RECIPROCATIVE LEGISLATIVE EXERCISE BY THE PARLIAMENT RECOGN I SING THE PREDOMINANCE OF DECISIONS RENDERED UNDER THE RELEVANT STATE LAW. IN TH I S VIEW OF THE MATTER, ALL THE APPELLANTS HAV I NG BEEN CLASSIFIED AS PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CRED I T SOC I ET I ES B Y THE COMPETENT AUTHOR I TY UNDE R TH E KCS ACT , I T HAS NECESSAR IL Y TO BE HELD THAT THE PRINCIPAL OBJECT OF SUCH SOCIETIES IS TO UNDERTAKE AGR I CULTURAL CRE DIT ACTIVITIES AND TO PROVIDE LOANS AND ADVANCES FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES , THE RATE ' OF INTEREST ON SUCH LOANS AND ADVANCES TO BE AT THE RATE FIXED BY THE REGISTRAR OF CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES UNDER THE KCS ACT AND HAV I NG I TS AREA OF OPERATION CONFINED TO A VILLAGE, PANCHAYAT OR A MUNICIPALITY. THIS IS THE CONSEQUENCE OF THE DEFINITION CLAUSE IN SECTION 2(OAA) OF THE KCS ACT. THE AUTHORITIES UNDER THE IT ACT CANNOT PROBE INTO ANY ISSUE OR SUCH MATTER RELATING TO SUCH APPLICANTS. 16. THE POSITION OF 1 AW BE ING AS ABOVE WITH REFERENCE TO THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS, THE APPELLANTS HAD SHOWN TO THE AUTHORITIES AND THE TRIBUNAL THAT THEY ARE PRIMARY AGRICULTURA L CREDIT SOCIETIES IN TERMS OF CLAUSE (CCIV) OF SECTION 5 OF THE BR ACT, HAVING REGARD TO THE PRIMARY OBJ ECT OR PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF EACH OF THE APPELLANTS. IT IS ALSO CLEAR FROM THE MATERIALS ON RECORD THAT THE BYE - LAWS OF EACH OF THE APPELLANTS DO . NOT PERMIT ADMISSION OF ANY OTHER CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY AS MEMBER, EXCEPT MAY BE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROV ISO TO SUB - CLAUSE 2 OF SECTION 5(CCIV) OF THE BR ACT. THE DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE TRIBUNAL WHICH ARE IMPEACHED IN THESE APPEALS DO NOT CONTAIN ANY FINDING OF FACT TO THE EFFECT THAT THE BYE - 1AWS OF ANY OF THE APPELLANT OR ITS CLASS I FICATION BY THE COMPETE NT AUTHORITY UNDER THE KCS ACT IS ANYTHING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE HAVE STATED HEREIN ABOVE. FOR THIS REASON, IT CANNOT BUT BE HELD THAT THE APPELLANTS ARE ENTITLED TO EXEMPTION FROM THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P OF THE IT ACT BY VIRTUE OF SUB - SECTION 4 OF THAT SECT; ON. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THE APPEALS SUCCEED. ITA NO . 591/C/2014 4 17. IN THE LIGHT OF THE AFORESAID, WE ANSWER SUBSTANTIA 1 QUESTION 'A' IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANTS AND HOLD THAT THE TRIBUNAL ERRED IN LAW IN DECIDING THE ISSUE REGARDING THE ENTITLEMENT OF EXEMPT I ON UNDER SECTION 80P AGAINST THE APPELLANTS. WE HOLD THAT THE PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETIES, REGISTERED AS SUCH UNDER THE KCS ACT; AND CLASSIFIED SO, UNDER THAT ACT, INCLUDING THE APPELLANTS AR E ENTITLED TO SUCH EXEMPTION. 5.2 IN TH E INSTANCE CASE, THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE KERALA COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT AND THE BYE - LAWS ARE PLACED ON RECORD. IT IS CLEAR FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE SAME THAT THE ASSESSEE IS PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY AND PROVI DING AGRICULTURAL CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS. THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, IN THE ABOVE CITED JUDGMENT HAS HELD THAT SUCH SOCIETIES ARE ENTITLED TO THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2) OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS OF THE HONBL E JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT (SUPRA), WE ALLOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 6 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 2 ND DAY OF JUNE 2016 . SD/ - SD/ - ( B P JAIN ) ( GEORGE GEORGE K ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER COCHIN: DATED 2 ND JUNE 2016 RAJ* ITA NO . 591/C/2014 5 COPY TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT , 5 . DR 6 . GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, COCHIN