M/s.Mavilayi Service Co-op Bank Ltd, Kannur V. ITO, Kannur

ITA 660/COCH/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8392 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 19-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A DHANARAJ
• Assessee Lawyers: VEDANGA R PRABHU
• Keywords: Question of law; Competent authority

Judgement Text

( 7 APPEALS) 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH KOCHI BEFORE S/ SHRI B P JAIN , AM & GEORGE GEORGE K, JM ITA NO 660/COCH/2013 (A SST YEA 2008 - 09 ) M/S MAVILAYI SERVICECOOP BANK LTD., MOONAMPALAM MAVILAYI PO , KANNUR PAN NO. AAAAM8091L VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, KANNUR ( APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SH VEDANGA R PRABHU REVENUE BY SH A DHANARAJ, SR DR DATE OF HEARING 19 TH , JU LY 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19 TH JU LY 2016 ITA NO 338 /COCH/201 6 (A SST YEA 200 9 - 10 ) M/S CHOVVA COOP RURAL BANK LTD., CHOVVA PO PAN NO. AAAAT3289K VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, KANNUR ( APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SH ANIL D NAIR REVENUE BY SH A DHANARAJ, SR DR DATE OF HEARING 19 TH , JULY 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19 TH JULY 2016 ITA NO S 715 TO 718/COCH/2013 (A SST YEA 200 7 - 08 TO 2010 - 11 ) THE IRINAVE SERVICE COOP BANK LTD., K P W II 569 CRC HAJI ROAD IRINAVE , KANNUR PAN NO. AABAT3987B VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, KANNUR ( APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SH GEORGE THOMAS REVENUE BY SH A DHANARAJ, SR DR DATE OF HEARING 19 TH , JULY 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19 TH , J ULY 2016 ( 7 APPEALS) 2 ITA NO 191/COCH/2016 (A SST YEA 2010 - 11 ) M/S VAZHAPPALLY SERVICE COOP BANK LTD., K 108 VAZHAPPALLY CHANGANACHERRY KOTTAYAM PAN NO. AAAAV1 562B VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3 THIRUVALLA ( APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE - ADJOURNMENT PETITION FILED REVENUE BY SH A DHANARAJ, SR DR DATE OF HEARING 19 TH , JULY 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19 TH JULY 2016 ORDER PER B P JAI N, AM ; THESE ARE SEVEN A PPEALS FILED BY DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ARISE OUT OF THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) AS PER THE DETAILS GIVEN UNDER: SL.NO. ITA NO. NAME OF THE ASSESSEE CIT(A)S ORDER DATE 1 660/COCH/2013 M/S MAVILAYI SERVICECOOP BANK LTD 30.08.2 013 2 191/COCH/2016 M/S VAZHAPPALLY SERVICE COOP BANK LTD., 10.02.2016 3 338/COCH/2015 M/S CHOVVA COOP RURAL BANK LTD 20.03.2015 4 - 7 715 TO 718/COCH/2013 THE IRINAVE SERVICE COOP BANK LTD., 30.08.2013 2 SINCE COMMON ISSUE IS INVOLVED IN ALL THESE APPEALS; THEREFORE, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THEY WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. ( 7 APPEALS) 3 3 IN THE CASE IN ITA NO. 191/COCH/2016, THE ASSESSEE FILED ADJOURNMENT PETITIONS. SINCE THERE WAS NO SUFFICIENT CAUSE MENTIO NED IN THE PETITIONS AND ALSO NONE APPEARED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE SAME ARE REJECTED. ACCORDINGLY, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OFF THE SAME EXPARTE AFTER HEARING THE LD DR AND CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 4 THE SOLITARY ISSUE THAT IS RA ISED IN ALL THESE APPEALS 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. 5 BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS FOLLOWS: THE ASSESSEE, IN ALL THESE APPEALS, IS A PRIMARY AGRICU LTURAL 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 BY THE AO FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE IS PR IMARILY 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). 6 THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED IS IN APPEAL BEFOR E US. THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE 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 ( 7 APPEALS) 4 THE CHIRAKKAL SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD & OTHERS IN ITA NO.212 OF 2013 ( JUDGMENT DATED 15 TH FEBRUARY 2016). 6 .1 THE LD DR WAS UNABLE TO CONTROVERT THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. 7 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD.. THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF THE C HIRAKKAL SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD & OTHERS (SUPRA) HAS HELD THAT THE PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KERALA COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1969 IS ENTITLED TO THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2). THE HONBLE HIGH COURT WAS CONSIDE RING 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 DECIDING AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, THE ISSUE REGARDING ENTITLEMENT FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 8 0P, IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY? 7 .1 IN CONSIDERING THE ABOVE QUESTION OF LAW, THE HONBLE HIGH COURT RENDERED THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 15. APPELLANTS IN THESE DIFFERENT APPEALS ARE INDISPUTABLY SOCIETIES R EGISTERED 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 BOOKS, CLEARLY SHOW THAT THEY HAVE BEEN CLASSIFIED AS PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETIE S 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 REFERENCE TO, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE REGISTRATION OF A SOCIETY U N DER ANY STATE LAW RELATING T O CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES FOR THE TIME BEING; IT CANNOT BUT BE TAKEN THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE SOCIETIES SO REGISTERED UNDER THE ( 7 APPEALS) 5 STATE LAW AND ITS OBJECTS HAVE TO BE UNDERSTOOD 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 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 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 CLA USE 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 BEING AS ABOVE WITH REFERENCE TO THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS, THE APPELLANTS HAD SHOWN TO T HE 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 OBJECT OR PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF EACH OF THE APPELLANTS. IT IS ALSO CLEAR FROM THE MATERIA LS 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 PROVISO TO SUB - CLAUSE 2 OF SECTION 5(CCIV) OF THE BR ACT. THE DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE TRIB UNAL 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 COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER THE KCS ACT LS ANYTHING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE HAVE STATED HEREIN A BOVE. 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. 17. IN THE LIGHT O F 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 ION UNDER SECTION 80P AGAINST THE APPELLANTS. WE HOLD THAT THE PRIMARY AGRICULT URAL CREDIT SOCIETIES, REGISTERED AS SUCH UNDER THE KCS ACT; AND CLASSIFIED SO, UNDER THAT ACT, INCLUDING THE APPELLANTS ARE ENTITLED TO SUCH EXEMPTION. ( 7 APPEALS) 6 7 .2 IN ALL THESE CASES BEFORE US, THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION OF ALL THESE ASSESSEES, UNDER T HE KERALA COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT AND THE BYE - LAWS, ARE PLACED ON RECORD. IT IS CLEAR FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE SAME THAT THE ASSESSEE IN ALL THESE APPEALS ARE PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETIES AND PROVIDING AGRICULTURAL CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBER S. 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 HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT (SUPRA), WE ALLOW THE APPEALS OF ALL THESE ASSESSEE. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 8 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY ALL THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 19 TH DAY OF JULY 2016 . SD/ - SD/ - GEORGE GEORGE K ( B P JAIN ) (JUDICIAL MEMBER ) ACCO UNTANT MEMBER COCHIN: DATED 19 TH J ULY 2016 RAJ* COPY TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT, 5 . DR 6 . GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, COCHI