9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (5) TMI 1151 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) - assessee Co-operative Credit Society has earned interest income from the deposits with nationalized bank - Held that - The stand of the assessee right through has been that the society is not engaged in any other activity except receiving deposits from its members and providing credit facilities to its members. The assessee has made deposits with nationalized banks in order to maintain liquidity and provide ready availability of funds for repayment of deposits on redemption/maturity. These facts have not been refuted by the department. See ITO Vs. Niphard Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd. 2013 (7) TMI 1105 - ITAT PUNE Thus we hold that the assessee is eligible to claim deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i). - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Disallowance of Deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i): The appeal was filed by the assessee, a Co-operative Credit Society, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolhapur, which disallowed the deduction claimed under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee had declared NIL income in both the original and revised returns for the assessment year 2010-11, and claimed a refund. The scrutiny assessment revealed that the assessee had earned interest income of Rs. 29,28,361 from bank deposits, which was claimed as a deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). The Assessing Officer held that this interest income from deposits with non-cooperative banks did not qualify as business income from credit facilities extended to its members and was taxable under "Income From Other Sources." Aggrieved, the assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who upheld the Assessing Officer's decision by relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in Totgars' Co-op. Sale Society Ltd. vs. ITO, which held that interest income from surplus funds invested in short-term deposits and securities was taxable under Section 56 as "Income From Other Sources" and not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). The assessee further appealed to the Tribunal, arguing that the authorities erred in concluding that the interest income was not from business activities and in applying the Totgars' case. The assessee cited a Co-ordinate Bench decision in ITO vs. Niphard Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., which distinguished the Totgars' case and allowed the deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). The Department, represented by Shri M.M. Chate, supported the impugned order, reiterating that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) correctly followed the Totgars' judgment. The Tribunal reviewed the submissions, records, and relevant judgments, noting that the assessee is a Co-operative Credit Society and earned interest income from nationalized bank deposits. The Tribunal found the issue similar to the Niphard Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd. case, where it was held that the interest income was eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). The Tribunal distinguished the Totgars' case, noting that the funds in Totgars' were surplus from marketing agricultural produce, whereas in the present case, the funds were operational and maintained for liquidity to meet redemption/maturity obligations. The Tribunal also referenced other supportive judgments, including those from the Ahmedabad and Cochin Benches, which emphasized that interest income from operational funds invested to maintain liquidity qualified for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). Based on these considerations, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee's interest income was eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i), set aside the impugned order, and allowed the appeal. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the assessee is entitled to the deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the interest income earned from deposits with nationalized banks, as these were maintained for liquidity purposes and not as surplus funds. The decision was pronounced on May 13, 2015.
|
