TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 2033
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Delhi, ["learned Addl./Joint CIT(A)"], for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. The present appeal is delayed by 15 days. Along with the appeal, the assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of delay duly supported by the affidavit of the Chief Executive Officer of the assessee society. Having perused the submissions in the said application, we are of the considered view that sufficient cause prevented the assessee from filing the present appeal within the prescribed limitation period. Accordingly, the delay in filing the present appeal is condoned, and we proceed to decide the appeal on merits. 3. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - 1. For that the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 10. For that the appellant objects to the levy of interest under sections 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. At the outset, it is evident from the record that the appeal before the learned CIT(A) was filed after a delay of approximately 794 days. In the explanation furnished in Form 35 seeking condonation of the delay, it was submitted by the assessee that since the Assessing Officer ("AO") was not enforcing the demand raised pursuant to the assessment order, the assessee did not consider it necessary to file an appeal, as the issue involved therein was pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It was further submitted that the assessee thought it fit to file t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... section 80P of the Act would not be enforced and would be kept in abeyance as the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court allowing the deduction under section 80P of the Act in the case of Co-operative Societies was in operation and the final verdict of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the issue is awaited. In these circumstances, we are of the considered view that the assessee's belief that no immediate appellate recourse was called for so long as the demand remained unenforced cannot be said to be so unreasonable as to reflect an absence of bona fide on the part of the assessee, and the delay, though considerable, cannot be attributed to any deliberate or mala fide conduct on the part of the assessee. We are of the view that the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed on the assessee. 8. The AO, vide order dated 08/12/2016 passed under section 143(3) of the Act, held that took the view that, by virtue of sub-section (4) of section 80P, the provisions of section 80P of the Act would not apply in relation to any co-operative bank other than a primary agricultural credit society or a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank, and, since the assessee did not fall under either of the said categories, the AO held that the assessee is not entitled to claim the deduction under section 80P of the Act. Accordingly, the AO disallowed the deduction of Rs. 44,95,647/- claimed under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act and assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 44,95,650/-, as against the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ative society engaged in- (i) carrying on the business of banking or providing credit facilities to its members, or ............. ............. the whole of the amount of profits and gains of business attributable to any one or more of such activities" 12. Further, the term "co-operative society" is defined under section 2(19) of the Act as under: "(19) "co-operative society" means a co-operative 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 ;" 13. The AO denied the deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act by relying upon the provision of section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Supreme Court in PCIT vs. Annasaheb Patil Mathadi Kamgar Sahakari Pathpedi Ltd., reported in [2023] 150 taxmann.com 173 (SC), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that a taxpayer who is merely giving credit to its members cannot be said to be a Co-operative Bank/Bank under the Banking Regulation Act and the banking activities under the Banking Regulation Act are altogether different. The Hon'ble Supreme Court thus held that the taxpayer, a co-operative credit society, could not be termed a Bank/Co-operative Bank and that being a credit society, it was entitled to exemption under section 80(P)(2) of the Act. 15. Since there was no other basis for denying the deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, havi....