Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (4) TMI 1040

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... - BOMBAY High Court ) wherein while quashing the CBDT Circular No. 09 of 2002 dt. 11/09/2002 in no uncertain terms held that exemption granted to a cooperative society u/s 194A(3)(v) cannot be taken away by creating a distinction between different categories of members. It is further evident, SLP filed by the department against the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Thus, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court as aforesaid, which was also followed by ld. CIT(A), no differentiation can be made between the members of a cooperative society while applying the exemption provision of section 194A(3)(v) of the Act. In fact, ld. CIT himself while issuing notice u/s 263 as well as in more than one place in the impugned order has held the assessment order passed to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue on the reasoning that no differentiation between members can be made while applying TDS provision u/s 194A(3). Thus, applying the same logic, it is to be held that ld. CIT(A)'s order holding that interest payment to associate/nominal members is exempt from deduction of tax at source in view .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the deposits received from regular members, it pays 9.5% interest on the deposits received from associate members and 10% interest on the deposits received from nominal members. On going through the bye-laws of the society, AO also found difference in rights and privileges between regular members on one side and associate/nominal members on the other. He, therefore, opined that exemption as contemplated u/s 194A(3)(v) would apply only to a regular member and not associate/nominal members. Though, assessee objected to such proposition of the AO and contended that as the provision contained u/s 194A(3)(v) only speaks of member without any differentiation, AO cannot make a difference between regular member and associate/nominal member while granting exemption u/s 194A(3)(v) of the Act. Assessee in support of such contention, relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Jalgaon District Cooperative Society Bank Vs. Union of India (265 ITR 423). AO, however, did not find merit in the contentions of assessee. He observed that 'member' as envisaged u/s 194A(3)(v) only refers to a regular member and not all the members of the society. As far as CBDT Circu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ause notice to assessee on 14/03/2014 proposing to revise the assessment order on the following reasons: 1) Why the society should not be treated as cooperative bank and which is in the business of banking and which is liable to deduct tax u/s 194A(3) of the IT Act. 2) The AO has differentiated between regular member and nominal and associate member. But the IT Act does not differentiate between any categories of member. The differentiation between the member has resulted in the non- compliance to the TDS provision resulting in the loss of revenue. 5. In response to the show cause notice, assessee submitted its reply objecting to the initiation of proceeding u/s 263 of the Act by stating that assessment order cannot be revised as the issue on which section 263 is invoked has already merged with the order passed by ld. CIT(A). Further, it was submitted by assessee that the assessment order passed cannot be considered to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue as mere non-deduction of tax at source does not result in any loss of revenue since tax can be recovered from the deductee. Further, assessee submitted that observation of ld. CIT that assessee sh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that as AO treated the regular members as a different category thereby differentiating them from associate/nominal members, the order passed by him is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue. Thus, ld. CIT set aside the order passed by AO and directed him to redo the assessment by computing correct liability u/s 201(1) and 201(1A). In other words, he directed AO to recompute the liability u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) in so far as interest payments made to regular members. 7. Ld. AR submitted before us, the issue of liability to deduct tax at source on the members of assessee society stood concluded in the order passed by ld. CIT(A) while deciding assessee's appeal against the assessment order. He submitted, ld. CIT(A) having given categorical finding that no differentiation can be made between the different categories of members of a cooperative society in so far as applicability of section 194A(3)(v) is concerned, assessment order got merged with the order of the ld. CIT(A), hence, ld. CIT could not have invoked his power u/s263 of the Act to revise the assessment order. In this context, he relied upon the following decisions: 1. Parminder Singh Vs. ACIT, 151 TT .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... source on interest payment to any member as provision contained u/s 194A(3)(v) employs the term 'member', therefore, no differentiation can be made between the members while applying the said provision. Though, AO did not accept this contention and held that exemption applies only in case of regular members, however, ld. CIT(A) accepted assessee's claim that exemption provision as contemplated u/s 194A(3)(v) would apply not only to regular members but also to other members like associate/nominal members. While doing so, ld. CIT(A) has followed the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Jalgaon District Cooperative Society (supra). On careful analysis of the said decision, it is very much clear that Hon'ble Bombay High Court while quashing the CBDT Circular No. 09 of 2002 dt. 11/09/2002 in no uncertain terms held that exemption granted to a cooperative society u/s 194A(3)(v) cannot be taken away by creating a distinction between different categories of members. It is further evident, SLP filed by the department against the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Thus, as per the d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates