Venad Co-operative Society Ltd. No.T-1762 V. Union of India, Ministry of Finance and The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and The Income Tax Officer (I & CL)

WP(C)/22111/2024

AI Insights

The case involves the Venad Co-operative Society Ltd., which challenged a notice (Ext.P2) issued by the Income Tax Officer, Thiruvananthapuram, requesting information for the assessment year 2021-2022. The petitioner argued that as a co-operative society, it was entitled to deductions under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and its profits, which were credited to members, were not subject to income tax. The Income Tax Department contended that under Section 133 of the Act, they had the authority to call for information from any person or entity if it was relevant to any enquiry or proceeding under the Act. The court agreed with the Department, stating that the power to call for information is comprehensive and applicable regardless of the tax status of the income.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 693590 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Civil Appeal No.8719/2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: P G JAYASHANKAR; G KEERTHIVAS
• Assessee Lawyers: D AJAYA KUMAR
• Keywords: Co-operative Society; Income Tax; Section 133(6); Section 80P; Writ petition
• Section: 133(6); 80P

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 2ND SRAVANA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 22111 OF 2024 PETITIONER: VENAD CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO.T-1762 SAI TOWER, T,C -24/1985, THYCAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SOUMYA, AGED 41 YEARS, W/O. PRASANTH KUMAR, RESIDING AT T.C.50/1906, NADUVATHU, NEMOM P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 014. BY ADVS. D.SAJEEV AJAYA KUMAR P.J. RESPONDENTS: 1 UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BIOCK, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN – 110 001. 2 THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C.R.BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 018. 3 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (I & CL), 3RD FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KAWDIAR P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 003. BY ADVS. P.G. JAYASHANKAR (Sr.SC)(FOR R2 AND R3) G.KEERTHIVAS (Jr. SC) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 22111 OF 2024 2 JUDGMENT This writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P2 communication issued to the petitioner by the 3rd respondent calling upon the petitioner to furnish certain information for the assessment year 2021-2022. 2. According to the petitioner, since the petitioner is a co-operative society and since the petitioner is entitled to various deductions under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘1961 Act’), and also since the profits and gains of the petitioner by providing credit to its members are not be subject to any charge of income tax., the 3rd respondent was not authorised to issue Ext.P2 notice. A perusal of Ext.P2 notice shows that it is one issued under Section 133 (6) of the 1961 Act calling upon the petitioner to furnish certain information referred to in the said notice. 3. Sri. G.Keerthivas, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department would submit WP(C) NO. 22111 OF 2024 3 that the power under Section 133 of the 1961 Act is extremely comprehensive and even if it were to be assumed for argument’s sake that the income of the petitioner is exempt from taxation or that it was entitled to deduction under Section 80P of the 1961 Act, the 3rd respondent was competent to call for information from the petitioner. He refers specifically to the provisions of sub-section (6) of Section 133 of the 1961 Act in support of his contention. 4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department, I am of the view that the petitioner has not made out any case for interference with Ext.P2, even assuming that the contention of the petitioner that its income is not liable to a charge of income tax and that it was entitled to various deductions under Section 80P of the 1961 Act is accepted. Section 133 of the 1961 Act deals with the power of the income tax authorities to call for information. As rightly suggested by WP(C) NO. 22111 OF 2024 4 the learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department, the power under Section 133 of the 1961 Act is comprehensive and it will be open to the 3rd respondent to call for information from any person, including the petitioner, if the 3rd respondent has reason to believe that such information will be useful for or relevant to any enquiry or proceeding under the 1961 Act. In that view of the matter, the issuance of Ext.P2 cannot be termed illegal or unsustainable in law. Writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE ats WP(C) NO. 22111 OF 2024 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22111/2024 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE BYELAW OF THE PETITIONER CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 11/9/2023 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20/4/2023 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.8719/2022 OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA "