9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 1838 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80P in respect of interest received from the schedule bank - HELD THAT - As decided in own case , 2016 (5) TMI 1545 - ITAT MUMBAI as relying on QUEPEM URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. 2015 (6) TMI 573 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT where assessee-cooperative society could not be regarded as Cooperative Bank‟ on, mere fact that an insignificant proposition of revenue was coming from non-members, and thus, was entitled for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) - Decided against revenue.
Issues Involved:
1. Deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Classification of the assessee as a cooperative credit society versus a cooperative bank. 3. Applicability of Section 80P(4) and sub-clause (viia) to Section 2(24) of the Income Tax Act. 4. Consistency with previous appellate decisions and judicial precedents. Detailed Analysis: 1. Deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961: The primary issue in this appeal is whether the assessee, a cooperative credit society, is entitled to a deduction of ?43,52,760/- under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee filed its return declaring NIL income after claiming the said deduction. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed this deduction, contending that the assessee is engaged in banking business and does not qualify for the deduction under Section 80P. However, the First Appellate Authority allowed the deduction, and the Tribunal, referencing its previous decision in the assessee's own case for AY 2010-11, upheld this view, dismissing the revenue's appeal. 2. Classification of the Assessee as a Cooperative Credit Society versus a Cooperative Bank: The AO classified the assessee as a cooperative bank rather than a cooperative credit society, thus disallowing the deduction under Section 80P. The Tribunal, however, referred to the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the assessee's own case, which differentiated between cooperative societies and cooperative banks. The Tribunal cited the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's decision in the case of Quepem Urban Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., which held that a cooperative society could not be regarded as a cooperative bank merely because a minor portion of its revenue comes from non-members. Thus, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee is indeed a cooperative credit society and entitled to the deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). 3. Applicability of Section 80P(4) and Sub-Clause (viia) to Section 2(24) of the Income Tax Act: The revenue argued that the insertion of Section 80P(4) and sub-clause (viia) to Section 2(24) by the Finance Act, 2006, which came into effect from 1.4.2007, should be considered. These provisions exclude cooperative banks from the benefits of Section 80P. However, the Tribunal held that these provisions do not apply to cooperative credit societies, as established in previous judicial decisions, including the Tribunal's own decision in the case of Punjab National Bank Employees Credit Society Ltd. and RCF Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the revenue's argument on this ground. 4. Consistency with Previous Appellate Decisions and Judicial Precedents: The Tribunal emphasized maintaining consistency with its previous decisions and judicial precedents. The Tribunal's decision referenced multiple prior rulings, including those by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and various ITAT benches, which consistently upheld the entitlement of cooperative credit societies to deductions under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). The Tribunal reiterated that the facts of the case align with these precedents, and thus, there was no reason to deviate from established judicial interpretations. Conclusion: The appeal by the revenue was dismissed, and the Tribunal upheld the decision of the First Appellate Authority, allowing the deduction of ?43,52,760/- under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) to the assessee. The Tribunal's decision was grounded in consistent judicial interpretation that distinguishes cooperative credit societies from cooperative banks and affirms their eligibility for the said deduction. Order Pronouncement: The order was pronounced in the open court on 29th Dec, 2016.
|
