TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 568X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 22 - Shri B. R. Baskaran ( AM ) Assessee by : Shri Sanjay Parikh Department by : Ms. Naina Krishnakumar ORDER The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 12.03.2022 passed by Learned CIT(A), National faceless appeal Centre, Delhi and it relates to the assessment year 2014-15. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of Learned CIT(A) in confirming the rejection of deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest income earned from deposits kept with a co-operative bank. 2. The assessee is a labour co-operative society engaged in the activity of removing of grass in BPT area, sweeping of BPT roads and other labour related work. The assessee, inter alia, had earned interest income of Rs.3,26,288/- from deposits kept with co-operative banks. The assessee claimed deduction of the same u/s 80P(2)(d)/80P(2)(c)(ii) of the Act. The AO rejected the same. The Learned CIT(A) also held that the co-operative banks cannot be considered as co-operative societies within the meaning of sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Accordingly, he confirmed the order passed by the AO in rejecting the deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Aggrieved, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ociety, shall be deducted in computing the total income of the assessee. We may herein observe, that what is relevant for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) is that the interest income should have been derived from the investments made by the assessee co-operative society with any other cooperative society. We though are in agreement with the observations of the lower authorities that with the insertion of Sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P, vide the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from 01.04.2007, the provisions of Sec. 80P would no more be applicable in relation to any co-operative bank, other than a primary agricultural credit society or a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank, but however, are unable to subscribe to their view that the same shall also jeopardise the claim of deduction of a co-operative society under Sec. 80P(2)(d) in respect of the interest income on their investments parked with a co-operative bank. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the issue before us and are of the considered view that as long as it is proved that the interest income is being derived by a co-operative society from its investments made with any other co-operative ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e co-operative banks which are functioning at par with other banks would no more be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(4) of the Act. We are of the considered view that the reliance placed by the CIT (A) on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. (supra) being distinguishable on facts, thus, had wrongly been relied upon by him. The adjudication by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid case was in context of Sec. 80P(2)(a)(i), and not on the entitlement of a co-operative society towards deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) on the interest income on the investments parked with a co-operative bank. We further find that the reliance place by the ld. D.R on the order of the ITAT F bench, Mumbai in the case of Vaibhav Cooperative Credit Society (supra) is also distinguishable on facts. We find that the said order was passed by the Tribunal in context of adjudication of the entitlement of the assessee co-operative bank towards claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. We find that it was in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts that the Tribunal after carrying out a conjoint reading of Sec. 80P(2)(a)(i) r. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ITAT has also adjudicated an identical issue in favour of the assessee in the case of Rena Sahakari Sakkar Karkhane Ltd Vs. PCIT (ITA No.1249/PUN/2018 dated 07-01-2022) and the relevant discussions made by Pune bench are extracted below:- 7. We have heard the ld. authorised representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, as well as the judicial pronouncements relied upon by them. Our indulgence in the present appeal has been sought, for adjudicating, as to whether or not the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest income earned from the investments/deposits made with the co-operative banks is in order. In our considered view, the issue involved in the present appeal hinges around the adjudication of the scope and gamut of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P as had been made available on the statute, vide the Finance Act 2006, with effect from 01.04.2007. On a perusal of the order passed by the Pr. CIT under Sec. 263 of the Act, we find, that he was of the view that pursuant to insertion of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P, the assessee would no more be entitled for claim o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a primary agricultural credit society or a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank. However, at the same time, we are unable to subscribe to his view that the aforesaid amendment would jeopardize the claim of deduction of a co-operative society under Sec. 80P(2)(d) in respect of its interest income on investments/deposits parked with a co-operative bank. In our considered view, as long as it is proved that the interest income is being derived by a co-operative society from its investments made with any other co-operative society, the claim of deduction under the aforesaid statutory provision, viz. Sec. 80P(2)(d) would be duly available. We find that the term co-operative society‟ had been defined under Sec. 2(19) of the Act, as under:- (19) Co-operative society means a cooperative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912), or under any other law for the time being in force in any state for the registration of co-operative societies; We are of the considered view, that though the co-operative banks pursuant to the insertion of sub-section (4) to Sec. 80P would no more be entitled for claim of deduction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had observed, that the interest income earned by a co-operative society on its investments held with a cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act. Backed by the aforesaid conflicting judicial pronouncements, we may herein observe, that as held by the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. Vs. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr (1985) 156 ITR 11 (Bom), where there is a conflict between the decisions of nonjurisdictional High Court‟s, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Accordingly, taking support from the aforesaid judicial pronouncement of the Hon ble High Court of jurisdiction, we respectfully follow the view taken by the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and that of the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), wherein it was observed that the interest inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
