TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 417X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e eligibility of deduction u/s 80P of the I.T.Act. In view of the dictum laid we restore the issue of 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 be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed as deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T.Act. In allowing the appeals of the assessee, 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.). 6. 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 assessee and passed orders u/s 154 of the I.T.Act, disallowing the claim of the assessee u/s 80P(2) of the I.T.Act. 7. Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed these appeals before the Tribunal raising identical grounds, except variance in figures. Hence, we reproduce the grounds raised for assessment year 2009-2010, as under :- 1. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Thrissur u/s 250 of the I.T.Act, 1961 is opposed to law and contrary to the facts of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT (supra) held that the Assessing Officer has to conduct an inquiry into the factual situation as to the activities of the assessee society to determine the eligibility of deduction u/s 80P of the I.T.Act. It was held by the Hon ble High Court that the Assessing Officer is not bound by the registration certificate issued by the Registrar of Kerala Co-operative Society classifying the assessee-society as a co-operative society. The Hon ble High Court held that each assessment year is separate and eligibility shall be verified by the Assessing Officer for each of the assessment years. The finding of the Larger Bench of the Hon ble High Court reads as follows:- 33. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Citizen Co-operative Society [397 ITR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ciety 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 Co-operative 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 Apex Court in Ace Multi Axes Systems case (supra), since each assessment year is a separate unit, the intention of the legislature is in no manner defeated by not allowing deduction under Section 80P of the IT Act, by reason of sub-section (4) thereof, if the assessee society ceases to be the specified class of societies for which the deduction is provided, even if it was eligible in the initial years. 9.1 The CIT(A) had initially allowed the appeals of the assessee and granted deduction u/s 80P(2) of the I.T.Act. Subsequently, the CIT(A) passed order u/s 154 of the I.T.Act, wherein the claim of deduction u/s 80P of the I.T.Act was denied, by relying on the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
