Saptagiri Pattina Souharda Sahkari Niyamitha v ITO

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 0812 (Bang-Trib)

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 80P(2)(a)(i)

Entities registered under Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997 fitted into the definition of 'co-operative society' as enacted in section 2(19) and' therefore, subject to all the exceptions, assessee was entitled to deduction under section 80P.

Deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) - Allowability - Souharda Sahakar registered under Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997 -

Assessee claimed deduction under section 80P(2). According to the AO, benefit of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) was available only to a co-operative society and since assessee was only a Souharda Sahakar registered under Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997 and since under said Act, Co-operative Societies were not being registered, assessee could not be allowed the benefit of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i). Held: Entities registered under Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997 fitted into the definition of 'co-operative society' as enacted in section 2(19) and' therefore, subject to all the exceptions, assessee was entitled to deduction under section 80P.

Relied:M/s. Swabhimani Souharda Credit Co-operative Ltd. & Ors. v. Government of India & Ors. in Writ Petition No. 48414 of 2018 (T-IT), dated 16-1-2020 : 2020 TaxPub(DT) 0504 (Karn-HC)

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : in assessee's favour

A.Y. :

IN THE ITAT, BANGALORE BENCH

CHANDRA POOJARI, A.M. & BEENA PILLAI, J.M.

Saptagiri Pattina Souharda Sahkari Niyamitha v. ITO

I.T.A. No. 2319/Bang/2019

31 January, 2020

Appellant by: R.E. Balasubramaniam, CA

Respondent by: Swapna Das, JCIT (DR)

ORDER

Chandra Poojari, A.M.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), dated 23-8-2019. The relevant assessment year is 2016-17.

2. The assessee has raised the following grounds :--

'1. That the impugned order is opposed to facts and law in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the Appellant.

2. That the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in confirming the order of assessing officer and denying the deduction under section 80P(2), and in doing so :--