9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 1564X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent orders by Mum-C-(169)(1), dated 25.02.2022 and by Central Processing Centre, dated 26.06.2023, u/s. 154 of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), for AY 2020-21& 2021-22. 2. The sole issue involved in both the appeals relate to disallowance of claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest income earned by the assessee from deposits made by it with Cooperative bank. Since, common issue is involved in both the appeals, we draw the facts from the appeal in ITA No. 4328/Mum/2023 to arrive at our finding which will apply mutatis mutandis on the other appeal also. 3. Brief facts of the case as culled out from records are that assessee is a cooperative housing society deriving income from house p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ived interest income from various sources and has suo motto not claimed deduction in respect of interest income earned by it from banks other than cooperative banks. 6. On the above stated facts, the issue before us is no longer res integra as extensively dealt by Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in case of the PCIT vs. Totagar Cooperative Sales Society Limited [2017] 392 ITR 74 / 78 taxmann.com 169 (SC). Relevant findings given in para 7 to 12 are as under: "7. However, the contention being taken by the learned counsel is untenable. For the issue that was before ITAT, was a limited one, namely whether for the purpose of Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act, a Co-operative Bank should be considered as a Co-operative Society or not? For, if a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Co-operative Society in order to assess it: total income. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was not justified in denying the said deduction to the assessee respondent. 11. The learned counsel has relied on the case of Totgars Co- operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITΟ (2010) 322 ITR 283/188 Taxman 282 (SC). However, the said case dealt with the interpretation, and the deduction, which would be applicable under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T. Act. For, in the present case the interpretation that is required is of Section SOP(2)(d) of the L.T. Act and not Section S * OP(2)(a)(i) of the IT. Act. Therefore, the said judgment is inapplicable to the present case. Thus, neither of the two substantial questions of la canvassed by the le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that though the co-operative bank pursuant to the insertion of Sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P would no more be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P of the Act, but however, since a co-operative bank continues to be a co-operative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912), or under any other law for the time being enforced in any state for the registration of cooperative societies, therefore, the interest income derived by a cooperative society from its investments held with a co-operative bank, would be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 8. We also find that the issue before us of whether a co-operative society would be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon by the ld. A.R, also makes it clear beyond any scope of doubt, that the purpose behind enactment of sub-section (4) of Sec. 80P was to provide that the cooperative 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 Cooperative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO (2010) 322 ITR 283 (S.C) 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 ded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 taxmann.com 140/297 CTR 158/395 ITR 611 (Karnataka), the High Court had concluded that a cooperative society would not be entitled to claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d). We however find that as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of K. Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr [1983] 36 CTR 197/[1985] 156 ITR 11/[1983] 15 Taxman 594 (Bombay), where there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Court's, then a view which is in favour of the assessee is to be preferred as against that taken against him. Thus, 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 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
