M/s Bangalore Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd., Bangalore V. DCIT, Bangalore

ITA 903/BANG/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9772 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 04-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR P K SRIHARI
• Assessee Lawyers: S RANGANATH
• Keywords: Depreciation; Question of law
• Section: 143(3); 56

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRI BUNAL BANGALORE BENCH B, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.903(BANG) 2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) M/S BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, NO.723, 10 TH MAIN, 4 TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE APPELLAN T PAN NO.AAAAB1598B VS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), BANGALORE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.RANGANATH, CA REVENUE BY : DR.P.K.SRIHARI, ADDL.CIT DATE OF HEARING : 04-06-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2 6-06-2015 O R D E R PER SHRI VIJAYPAL RAO, JM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 01- 04-2014 OF CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS; 1.THE ORDER OF THE CIT IS BAD IN LAW 2.THE LD. APPELLATE AUTHORITY ERRED IN CONFIRMING T HE ACTION OF THE LD. ASSESSING AUTHORITY IN APPLYING THE CONC EPT OF NPA TREATING THE APPELLANT AS A BANK AND NOT AS CO- ITA NO.903(BANG)14 2 OPERATIVE SOCIETY MAKING ADDITION OF RS.19,16,609/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST RECEIVABLE ON STANDARD ASSET FR OM LOAN GRANTED TO THE MEMBERS. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, L.A.A ERRED IN F OLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE O F TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD VS ITO, WHICH IS NOT APPLICABLE TO FACTS OF THE CASE. 4. THE L.A.A ERRED IN NOT GRANTING DEDUCTION ON ACC OUNT U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) ON EXCESS DEPRECIATION AMOUNTING TO RS.41.578/- 5.THE L.A.A. ERRED IN NOT GRANTING DEDUCTION ON ACC OUNT U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) ON PROVISION TOWARDS GRATUITY AMOUNTIN G TO RS.1,10,000/-. 2. GROUND NO.1 IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND DOES NOT R EQUIRE ANY SPECIFIC FINDING, AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT ADVANCED ANY ARGUM ENT EXCEPT ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE. 3. GROUND NO.2 REGARDING DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P IN RESPECT OF INTEREST RECEIVABLE ON STANDARD ASSET. T HE ASSESSEE IS A CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA ST ATE CO-OPERATIVE ACT, 1959. THE ASSESSEE PROVIDES CREDIT FACILITY AND FIN ANCIAL SERVICES TO ITS MEMBERS. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FO R THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ON 26-09-2010 DECLARING NIL INCOME, A FTER CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE IT ACT, 1961. THE AO IN T HE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNIS H THE DETAILS OF THE INTEREST RECEIVABLE ON NON-PERFORMING ASSETS AS WEL L AS ON STANDARD ASSETS ITA NO.903(BANG)14 3 WHICH HAS NOT BEEN ACCOUNTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE S ECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY APPEARED BEFORE THE AO AND SUBMITTED THAT T HERE IS NO CONCEPT OF NPA IN THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, AS IT IS IN THE CA SE OF BANK AS WELL AS NON- FINANCIAL BANKING BUSINESS HOWEVER, THE DETAILS OF INTEREST RECEIVABLE ON STANDARD ASSETS WERE PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE AO DISALLOWED THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P IN RESPECT OF THE INTEREST RECEIV ABLE AMOUNTING TO RS.19,16,609/- AND THE SAME IS BROUGHT TO TAX. THE AO HAS ALSO DISALLOWED THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE IT ACT, IN RESPECT OF OTHER INTEREST OF THE ASSESSEE BY TREATING THE ASSESSEE AS A CO-OP ERATIVE BANK AND HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINES S OF BANKING. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESS EE U/S 80P IN RESPECT OF THE OTHER INCOMES, BUT CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE O F THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE IT ACT, 1961 IN RESPECT OF THE INTEREST RECEIVABLE ON THE STANDARD ASSETS. THUS, THE CIT(A) HAS GRANTED PART RELIEF T O THE ASSESSEE. 4. BEFORE US, LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER KARNATAK A STATE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959. THE ASSESSEE IS FOLLOWING CA SH METHOD OF ACCOUNTING AND RECOGNIZE THE INCOME ONLY ON THE RECEIPT AND TH EREFORE, THE INTEREST RECEIVABLE ON THE LOANS TO THE MEMBERS HAS NOT BEEN ACCOUNTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE AO TREATED THE ACTIVITY OF THE ASSES SEE HAS CO-OPERATIVE BANKING BUSINESS AND THEREFORE, DISALLOWED THE CLAI M OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 80P OF THE IT ACT, 1961. THE CIT(A), THOUGH ACCEP TED THE CLAIM OF SECTION ITA NO.903(BANG)14 4 80P OF THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF OTHER INTEREST IN COMES EXCEPT THE INTEREST RECEIVABLE ON THE STANDARD ASSETS WHICH IS NOT ACCO UNTED BY THE ASSESSEE AS IT WAS OUTSTANDING. 5. THE LEARNED AR CONTENDED THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE IS A CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY AS ACCEPTED BY THE CIT(A) THAN, T HE INTEREST EARNED BUT NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE LOANS GIVEN TO THE MEMBERS CANNOT BE BROUGHT TO TAX BY DENYING DEDUCTION U/S 80-P OF THE IT ACT, 1961. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION HE HAS RELIED UPON THE FO LLOWING DECISIONS; 1. ACIT VS M/S BANGALORE COMMERCIAL TRANSPORT CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. ITA NO.1069(B)/201 0 DATED 08/04/2011 (ITAT, BENCHB BANGALORE. 2. ITO VS M/S JANKALYAN NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA LTD (2012) 24 TAXMAN.COM 129(PUNE-TRIB.) DATED 26/06/2012). 3. DCIT VS JAYALAKSHMI MAHILA VIVIDODESHAGALA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LTD ITA NOS.1 TO 3(PNJ) 1012 DATE D 30/03/2012. 4.CIT VS SRI BILURU GURUBASAVA PATTINA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA, BAGALKOT ITA NO.5006/2013 OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. 5. CIT VS NOMIN VIKAS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY :LTD. I N TAX APPEAL NO.442 OF 2013 OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT. 6. THE LEARNED AR ALSO RELIED UPON THE LATEST DECI SION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF TUMKUR MER CHANTS SOUHARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE LTD VS ITO (2015) 55 TAXMAN.COM 447. ITA NO.903(BANG)14 5 7. ON THE OTHER HAND, LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED THE DETAILS OF THE LOANS GIVEN TO THE MEMBERS AND THEREFORE, IT IS NOT CLEAR FROM THE RECORD WHETHER THE INTEREST R ECEIVABLE ON THE STANDARD ASSET IS IN RESPECT OF THE LOAN GIVEN TO THE MEMBER S OF THE ASSESEE SOCIETY. HE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IN THE CASE OF MERCHA NTS SOUHARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE LTD VS ITO, (SUPRA), THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS DISTINGUISHED THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE O F TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE, SOCIETY LTD VS ITO(2010) 322 ITR 283 BY NOTIN G THE FACT THAT THE INTEREST INCOME DERIVED BY THE SOCIETY ON THE SHORT TERM DEPOSIT OF THE INCOME OR CAPITAL NOT IMMEDIATELY REQUIRED TO BE LE ND TO THE MEMBERS. FURTHER, THE SOCIETY IN THE SAID CASE, SHOWN THE SA ID INTEREST INCOME ON THE SHORT TERM DEPOSIT AS A LIABILITY IN THE BALANCE SH EET PAYABLE TO THE MEMBERS AND THEREFORE, IT WAS NOT SHOWN AS INCOME O F THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THE LEARNED DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE DECISIO N RELIED UPON BY THE LEARNED AR IS NOT APPLICABLE IN THE FACTS OF THE PR ESENT CASE. HE HAS RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PE RUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THERE IS NO DISPUTE REGARDING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA STATE CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT AND THE CIT(A) HAS ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESS EE U/S 80P OF THE IT ACT, THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT A BANKING CO-OPERATIVE SOC IETY. THE INTEREST INCOME ON WHICH THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE ACT WAS DENIE D BY THE CIT(A) IS THE ITA NO.903(BANG)14 6 INTEREST EARNED ON STANDARD ASSETS WHICH WAS OUTSTA NDING AS ON 31 ST MARCH, 2010. THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS CO NTENDED THAT THE STANDARD ASSETS IS NOTHING BUT IT REPRESENTS LOAN G IVEN TO THE MEMBERS OF THE ASSESSEE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY AND THEREFORE, TH E INTEREST EARNED ON THE SAID LOAN CANNOT BE GIVEN A DIFFERENT TREATMENT THA N THE INTEREST RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR. ONCE CIT(A) HAS A CCEPTED THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY AS A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY AND ENGAGED IN PR OVIDING CREDIT FACILITY TO ITS MEMBERS THAN THE INTEREST EARNED BY THE ASSESSE E ON THE LOANS TO ITS MEMBERS CANNOT BE GIVEN A DIFFERENT COLOUR THAN THE INCOME OF INTEREST RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE OTHER LOANS GIVEN T O THE MEMBERS. FURTHER, MERELY BECAUSE, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT ACCOUNTED THE SAID INTEREST DUE ON THE LOAN GIVEN TO THE MEMBERS BECAUSE OF THE REASON THAT IT WAS OUTSTANDING, THE SAID INCOME WOULD NOT PARTAKE A DI FFERENT CHARACTER, THAN THE INCOME ON THE OTHER LOANS PROVIDED TO THE MEMBE RS AND RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE HONBLE JURISD ICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS SRI BILURU GURUBASAVA PATTINA SA HAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA (SUPRA) WHILE DEALING WITH AN IDENTICAL I SSUE OF ALLOWABILITY OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P HAS HELD AS UNDER; 8.1. THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN THE CAS E OF SRI BILURU GURUBASAVA PATTINA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA, SUPRA WHICH WAS FOLLOWED IN THE CASES OF GENERAL INSURANCE EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SO CIETY LTD. AND KARNATAKA HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF VASAVI MULTIPURPOSE SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMITHA, IT A ITA NO.903(BANG)14 7 NO.505/2013 DATED 27/06/2014, SUPRA, HAS CLEARLY HE LD THAT A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED AS CO-OPERAT IVE SOCIETY, PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO MEMBERS AND NOT REGI STERED WITH THE RBI CANNOT BE DENIED THE EXEMPTION UNDER SECTIO N 80P(1)(I) OF THE IT ACT. THE OPERATIVE PART OF THE JUDGMENT READS AS FOLLOWS; THEREFORE, THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE IS CL EAR, IF A CO-OPERATIVE BANK IS EXCLUSIVELY CARRYING ON BANKIN G BUSINESS, THEN THE INCOME DERIVED FROM THE SAID BUS INESS CANNOT BE DEDUCTED IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE SAID INCOME IS LIABLE FOR TAX. A CO -OPERATIVE BANK AS DEFINED UNDER THE BANKING REGULATION ACT IN CLUDES THE PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OR A PRIMAR Y CO- OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. THE LEGISLATURE DID NOT WANT TO DENY THE SAID BENEFITS TO A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OR A PRIMARY CO -OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. THEY DID NOT WANT TO EXTEND THE SAID BENEFIT TO A CO-OPERATIVE BANK W HICH IS EXCLUSIVELY CARRYING ON BANKING BUSINESS I.E THE PU RPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT. THEREFORE, AS THE ASSESSEE IS NOT A CO- OPERATIVE BANK CARRYING ON EXCLUSIVELY BANKING BUSI NESS AND AS IT DOES NO POSSESS A LICENCE FROM RESERVE B ANK OF INDIA TO CARRY ON BUSINESS, IT IS NOT A CO-OPERATIV E BANK. IT IS A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY WHICH ALSO CARRIES ON THE BUSINESS OF LENDING MONEY TO ITS MEMBERS WHICH IS COVERED UN DER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) I.E CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS O F BANKING FOR PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS. THE O BJECT OF THE AFORESAID AMENDMENT IS NOT TO EXCLUDE THE BENEFIT E XTENDED UNDER SECTION 80P(1) TO SUCH SOCIETY.IN THE INSTANT CASE, WHEN THE STATUS OF THE ASSESSEE IS A CO- ITA NO.903(BANG)14 8 OPERATIVE SOCIETY AND IS NOT A CO-OPERATIVE BANK, T HE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY EXTENDING THE BEN EFIT OF EXEMPTION FROM PAYMENT OF TAX UNDER SECTION 80P(2)( A)(I) OF THE ACT IS CORRECT. 8.2 THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT IS A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETI ES ACT, 1959 ENGAGED IN PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS HAS BEEN CLEARLY MENTIO0NED BY THE AO IN PARA-3 OF HIS AFORESAID ASSESSMENT ORDER. IT IS ALSO NOT THE CAS E OF THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE IS REGISTERED WITH THE RBI AS A B ANK. IN ITS AFORESAID SUBMISSIONS DATED 18-11-2014 THE APPE LLANT HAS CLEARLY STATED WITH THE HELP OF NECESSARY EVIDE NCE AND AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 02-9-2014 TO THIS EFFECT THAT TH E APPELLANT IS A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARN ATAKA CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959 ENGAGED IN PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES ONLY TO ITS MEMBERS AND IT DOES NOT POSS ESSES ANY BANKING LICENCE FROM THE RBI. IT IS THEREFORE, C LEAR THAT THE APPELLANTS CASE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE AFORESA ID DECISIONS OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF KARNA TAKA IN THE CASES OF SRI BILURU GURUBASAVA PATTINA SAHAKARI SAN GHA NIYAMITHA, SUPRA WHICH WAS FOLLOWED IN THE CASE OF GENERAL INSURANCE EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD , AND KARNATAKA HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF VASAVI MULTIPURPOSE SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMITHA ITA NO.505/2013 DATED 7-06-2014, SUPRA. THEREFORE, IN V IEW OF THE FOREGOING DISCUSSION AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID DECISIONS OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COUR T OF KARNATAKA. IT IS HELD THAT THE APPELLANT CASE IS NOT COVERED BY SECTION 80P(4) AS IT IS NOT A CO-OPERATIVE BANK AND ITA NO.903(BANG)14 9 THEREFORE, IT IS ENTITLED TO THE EXEMPTION U/S 80P( 2)(A)(I) OF THE IT ACT. 9. WE FURTHER NOTE IN CASE OF TUMKUR MERCHANTS SOU HARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE LTD.(SUPRA) THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAS REITERATED ITS EARLIER VIEW AND HELD IN PARA-9 TO 1 0 AS UNDER; 9. IN THIS CONTEXT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE JUDGMENT O F THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S TOTGARS CO-OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. ON WHICH RELIANCE IS PLACED, THE SUPRE ME COURT WAS DEALING WITH A CASE WHERE THE ASSESSEE CO-OPERA TIVE SOCIETY, APART FROM PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO THE MEMBERS, WAS ALSO IN THE BUSINESS OF MARKETING OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE GROWN BY ITS MEMBERS. THE SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED FROM MARKETING AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE TO ITS MEMBERS WAS RETAINED IN MANY CASES. THE SAI D RETAINED AMOUNT WHICH WAS PAYABLE TO ITS MEMBERS FR OM WHOM PRODUCE WAS BOUGHT, WAS INVESTED IN A SHORT TE RM DEPOSIT/SECURITY. SUCH AN AMOUNT WHICH WAS RETAIN ED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS A LIABILITY AND IT WAS SHO WN IN THE BALANCE SHEET ON THE LIABILITY SIDE. THEREFORE, TO THAT EXTENT, SUCH INTEREST INCOME CANNOT BE SAID TO BE ATTRIBUTA BLE EITHER TO THE ACTIVITY MENTIONED IN SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) O F THE ACT OR UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(III) OF THE ACT. THEREFOR E, IN THE FACTS OF THE SAID CASE, THE APEX COURT HELD THE AO WAS RI GHT IN TAXING THE INTEREST INCOME INDICATED ABOVE UNDER SE CTION 56 OF THE IT ACT. FURTHER, THEY MADE IT CLEAR THAT T HEY ARE CONFINING THE SAID JUDGMENT TO THE FACTS OF THAT CA SE. THEREFORE, IT IS CLEAR, SUPREME COURT WAS NOT LAYIN G DOWN ANY LAW. ITA NO.903(BANG)14 10 10. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE AMOUNT WHICH WAS INVE STED IN BANKS TO EARN INTEREST WAS NOT AN AMOUNT DUE TO ANY MEMBERS. IT WAS NOT THE LIABILITY. IT WAS NOT SH OWN AS LIABILITY IN THEIR ACCOUNT. IN FACT THIS AMOUNT W HICH IS IN THE NATURE OF PROFITS AND GAINS, WAS NOT IMMEDIATELY R EQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR LENDING MONEY TO THE MEMBERS, A S THERE WERE NO TAKERS. THEREFORE, THEY HAD DEPOSITED THE MONEY IN A BANK SO AS TO EARN INTEREST. THE SAID INTEREST I NCOME IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF BANKIN G AND THEREFORE IT IS LIABLE TO BE DEDUCTED IN TERMS OF S ECTION 80P(1) OF THE ACT. IN FACT SIMILAR VIEW IS TAKEN BY THE A NDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS ANDHRA PRA DESH STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD (2011) 200 TAXMAN 220/1 2 TAXMAN.COM 66. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATER, THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES DENYING THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION OF THE AFORESAID AMOUNT IS UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY SET ASIDE. THE SUBSTANTI AL QUESTION OF LAW IS ANSWERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AG AINST THE REVENUE. HENCE, WE PASS THE FOLLOWING ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AS WELL AS IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COU RT WE HOLD THAT IF THE INTEREST AMOUNT OF RS.19,06,609/- ON THE STANDARD A SSETS REPRESENTING THE LOAN GIVEN TO THE MEMBERS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY , THAN THE SAID INCOME IS ELIGIBLE FOR THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P BEING THE INCOME FROM THE ACTIVITY OF CREDIT FACILITY TO THE MEMBER OF THE SOCIETY. THE REFORE, SUBJECT TO THE VERIFICATION OF THIS FACT THAT THE INTEREST INCOME OF RS.19,,06,609/- IS ITA NO.903(BANG)14 11 EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE LOAN TO THE MEMBERS O F THE SOCIETY, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSE E IS ALLOWED IN ABOVE TERMS. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 26 TH JUNE, 2015 SD/- (JASON P BOAZ) SD/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: BANGALORE D A T E D : 26 TH JUNE, 2015 AM* COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A)-II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER AR, ITAT, BANGALORE