TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 680X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f deduction u/s 80P(2) to the files of the Assessing Officer to examine the activities of the assessee and determine whether the activities are in compliance with the activities of a co-operative society functioning under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 and accordingly grant deduction u/s 80P(2) of the I.T.Act. Interest on the investments with Co-operative Banks and other Banks - Tribunal in the case of Kizhathadiyoor Service Co-operative Bank Limited [ 2016 (7) TMI 1405 - ITAT COCHIN] had held that interest income earned from investments with treasuries and banks is part of banking activity of the assessee, and therefore, the said interest income was eligible to be assessed as `income from business instead of `income from other sources . However, as regards the grant of deduction u/s 80P of the I.T.Act on such interest income, the Assessing Officer shall follow the law laid down by the Larger Bench of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. V. CIT (supra) and examine the activities of the assessee-society before granting deduction u/s 80P of the I.T.Act on such interest income. Appeals filed by the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the I.T.Act. In allowing the appeals of the assessees, the CIT(A) followed the judgment of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Chirakkal Service Co-operative Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT [(2016) 384 ITR 490 (Ker.). 5. Subsequently, the CIT(A) issued notices u/s 154 of the I.T.Act proposing to rectify his orders passed, in view of the subsequent judgment of the Full Bench of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT [ITA No.97/2016 order dated 19th March, 2019]. The assessee objected to the issuance of notices. However, the CIT(A) rejected the objections raised by the assessees and passed orders u/s 154 of the I.T.Act, disallowing the claim of the assessees u/s 80P(2) of the I.T.Act. 6. Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the assessees have filed these appeals before the Tribunal raising the following identical grounds:- 1. The order dated 3-9-2019 passed under section 154 r.w.s 250 of the Income Tax Act modifying the order dated 5- 3-2019 and thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant confirming the order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2 (4), Trivandrum is highly ille ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t modifying the order dated 5-3-2019 and thereby to set aside the order dated 27-12-2016 of the Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2 (4), Trivandrum for the AY 2012-13 and to allow the appeal. 7. The learned AR relied on the grounds raised. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, strongly supported the orders of the Income-tax authorities. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Chirakkal Service Co-operative Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT [(2016) 384 ITR 490 (Ker.)] had held that when a certificate has been issued to an assessee by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies characterizing it as primary agricultural credit society, necessarily, the deduction u/s 80P(2) of the I.T.Act has to be granted to the assessee. However, the Full Bench of the Hon ble Kerala High Court in the case of The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT (supra) had reversed the above findings of the Hon ble Kerala High Court in the case of Chirakkal Service Co-operative Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT (supra) . The Larger Bench of the Hon ble Kerala High Court in the case of The Mavilayi S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch societies and that, Primary Agricultural Credit Societies registered as such under the KCS Act and classified so, under the Act, including the appellants are entitled to such exemption. 34. In Chirakkal [384 ITR 490] the Division Bench expressed a divergent opinion, without noticing the law laid down in Antony Pattukulangara [2012 (3) KHC 726] and Perinthalmanna [363 ITR 268]. Moreover, the law laid down by the Division Bench in Chirakkal [384 ITR 490] is not good law, since, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Citizen Co-operative Society [397 ITR 1], on a claim for deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, by reason of sub-section (4) thereof, the Assessing Officer has to conduct an enquiry into the factual situation as to the activities of the assessee society and arrive at a conclusion whether benefits can be extended or not in the light of the provisions under sub-section (4) of Section 80P of the IT Act. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Citizen Cooperative Society [397 ITR 1] the law laid down by the Division Bench Perinthalmanna [363 ITR 268] has to be affirmed and we do so. 35. In view of the law laid down by the Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
