M/s. Samrudha Souharda Credit Co-operative Limited, Bangalore v. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 5(2)(4), Bangalore

ITA 130/BANG/2020 | 2014-2015
Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2020 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 13021114 RSA 2020
Assessee PAN ABDFS9268A
Bench Bangalore
Appeal Number ITA 130/BANG/2020
Duration Of Justice 1 month(s)
Appellant M/s. Samrudha Souharda Credit Co-operative Limited, Bangalore
Respondent Income Tax Officer, Ward- 5(2)(4), Bangalore
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-02-2020
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 28-02-2020
Last Hearing Date 27-02-2020
First Hearing Date 27-02-2020
Assessment Year 2014-2015
Appeal Filed On 27-01-2020
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC - C BENCH BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.130/BANG/2020 : ASST.YEAR 2014-2015 ITA NO.131/BANG/2020 : ASST.YEAR 2015-2016 M/S. SAMRUDHA SOUHARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED NO.518/A 3 RD MAIN BANASHANKARI 1 ST STAGE SRINAGAR BANGALORE 560 050 PAN : ABDFS9268A. VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(2)(4) BANGALORE. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : --- NONE --- RESPONDENT BY : DR.GANESH R.GHALE STANDING COUNCIL FOR DR DATE OF HEARING : 27.02.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.02.2020 O R D E R THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST TWO DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) BOTH DATED 29.11.2019. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE 2014-2015 AND 2015-2016. 2. SINCE COMMON ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS THEY WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 3. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE COMMON EXCEPT VARIANCE IN FIGURES WE REPRODUCE GROUNDS RAISED IN ITA NO.130/BANG/2020 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014- 2015 AS UNDER:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-5 IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN LAW AND ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN SO FAR AS IT IS AGAINST THE APPELLANT. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-5 IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DENYING THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) FOR THE ITA NO.130-131/BANG/2020 M/S.SAMRUDHA SOUHARDHA CR.CO-OP..LTD. 2 APPELLANT. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE APPELLANT AS A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENTITLED FOR THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I). 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY THE APPELLANT IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I). CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO RECOGNIZE THE FACTS OF THE CASE IGNORED THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT AND HAS FAILED TO SPECIFICALLY ADJUDICATE ON THIS MATTER DESPITE SPECIFIC PLEA MADE BY THE APPELLANT. 4. LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO PASS A REASONED SPEAKING ORDER PROVIDING REASONS AS TO WHY JUDICIAL PRECEDENT(S) RELIED UPON BY THE APPELLANT CANNOT BE APPLIED IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE FOR ITS CLAIMS. 5. WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE LEARNED AO HAS FAILED TO APPLY THE DECISION OF HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS SRI BILURE GURUBASAVA PATTINA SAHAKARI SANGHA IYAMITA QUOTING THAT THE CASE HAS NOT REACHED FINALITY AS IT IS PENDING BEFORE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT DECISION OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IS BINDING SO LONG AS FACTS ARE SIMILAR. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO ADJUDICATE THE MATTER BY SETTING ASIDE THE ACTIONS OF THE AO IN THIS REGARD DESPITE FACTS BEING SIMILAR. 6. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN LEVYING INTEREST U/S 234A WITHOUT OBSERVING THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN U/S 139( 1). 7. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD ALTER SUBSTITUTE AND/OR DELETE ANY OR ALL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL URGED ABOVE. 8. FOR THE ABOVE AND OTHER GROUNDS TO BE URGED DURING THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE APPEAL BE ALLOWED IN THE INTEREST OF EQUITY AND JUSTICE. 4. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI ACT 1997. THE ASSESSEE E-FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-2015 ON 29.09.2014 DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.3 13 110 AFTER CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE I.T.ACT AMOUNTING TO RS.18 95 288. ITA NO.130-131/BANG/2020 M/S.SAMRUDHA SOUHARDHA CR.CO-OP..LTD. 3 THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) ON 20.12.2016 AFTER MAKING AN ADDITION / DISALLOWANCE OF RS.18 95 288 U/S 80P OF THE ACT. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DENYING THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE ACT THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO CONFIRMED THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE HENCE WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPEAL AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. 7. I HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. I FIND THAT SIMILAR ISSUE CAME UP FOR ADJUDICATION BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S.SINDHU CREDIT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMITA V. ITO IN ITA NO.2144/ BANG/2019 ORDER DATED 04 TH DECEMBER 2019 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS UNDER:- 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. REGARDING THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF PR. CIT VS. VIJAY SOUHARDA CREDIT SAHAKARI LTD. (SUPRA) ON WHICH RELIANCE WAS PLACED BY LD. DR OF REVENUE AS PER WHICH THE MATTER WAS RESTORED BACK TO AO TO EXAMINE THE APPLICABILITY OF THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE APEX COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF THE CITIZEN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. VS. ACIT (SUPRA) I FIND THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE THIS IS NOT THE CASE OF THE AO AS PER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THIS JUDGMENT OF HONBLE APEX COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF THE CITIZEN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. VS. ACIT (SUPRA) IS APPLICABLE IN THE PRESENT CASE. AS PER THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) ALSO NO FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) IS ITA NO.130-131/BANG/2020 M/S.SAMRUDHA SOUHARDHA CR.CO-OP..LTD. 4 THERE THAT THIS JUDGMENT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF THE CITIZEN CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. VS. ACIT (SUPRA) IS APPLICABLE IN THE PRESENT CASE. HENCE I HOLD THAT THIS JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT HAS NO APPLICABILITY IN THE PRESENT CASE IN VIEW OF THE FACTS DISCUSSED ABOVE. REGARDING THE ARGUMENT OF LD. DR OF REVENUE THAT THE EARLIER TRIBUNAL ORDER RENDERED BY THE DIVISION BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. UDAYA SOUHARDA CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA) SHOULD BE FOLLOWED IN PREFERENCE TO THE LATER DECISION OF SMC BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL RENDERED IN THE CASE OF SIDDARTHA PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMITHA VS. ITO (SUPRA) I FIND THAT IN THIS LATER CASE THE SMC BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS DULY CONSIDERED THE EARLIER DECISION OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL RENDERED IN THE CASE OF M/S. UDAYA SOUHARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY (SUPRA) AND IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT LD. CIT(A) AND AO IN THAT CASE HAS EXAMINED THE WHOLE ISSUE IN THE LIGHT OF KARNATAKA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI ACT 1997. BECAUSE OF THIS REASON IT WAS HELD BY THE SMC BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT ISSUE HAS TO BE DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND IT CANNOT BE REMANDED TO THE AO AS WAS CANVASSED BY THE REVENUE AND HENCE THIS ARGUMENT HAS NOT MERIT THAT EVEN NOW THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE AO FOR FRESH DECISION ALTHOUGH THE SMC BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE. REGARDING THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. HARI NATH AND CO. (SUPRA) ON WHICH RELIANCE WAS PLACED BY LD. DR OF REVENUE I FIND THAT IN THIS CASE IT WAS HELD BY HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT THAT DECISION OF DIVISION BENCH GIVEN IN AN EARLIER CASE IS BINDING ON ITS SUBSEQUENT BENCH OF THE SAME HIGH COURT. THERE IS NO QUARREL ON THIS ASPECT BUT THIS IS NOT THE CASE OF THE SMC BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL AS PER THE SUBSEQUENT ORDER THAT THE DECISION OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. UDAYA SOUHARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA) IS NOT BINDING ON THE TRIBUNAL WHETHER SMC BENCH OR DIVISION BENCH. AS PER THE SUBSEQUENT DECISION OF THE SMC BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IT WAS HELD THAT AS PER THE EARLIER DECISION OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL THE MATTER WAS RESTORED BACK TO THE AO FOR A FRESH DECISION IN THE LIGHT OF KARNATAKA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI ACT 1997 AND THIS WAS DONE BY CIT (A) AND AO AS DIRECTED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND BECAUSE OF THIS REASON SMC BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL HELD THAT NOW THE ISSUE HAS TO BE DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL AT ITS OWN LEVEL INSTEAD OF AGAIN RESTORING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF AO AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF KARNATAKA SOUHARDA ITA NO.130-131/BANG/2020 M/S.SAMRUDHA SOUHARDHA CR.CO-OP..LTD. 5 SAHAKARI ACT 1997 THE SMC BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT SOUHARDA CO-OPERATIVES ARE ALSO ONE FORM OF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES REGISTERED UNDER A LAW IN FORCE IN THE STATE OF KARNATAKA FOR REGISTRATION OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND THEREFORE THE CONCLUSION OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES THAT CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND CO-OPERATIVES ARE DIFFERENT AND THAT CO- OPERATIVE REGISTERED AS SOUHARDA SAHAKARI CANNOT BE REGARDED AS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES IS UNSUSTAINABLE. AFTER HOLDING SO THE TRIBUNAL RESTORED BACK THE MATTER TO THE AO FOR FRESH DECISION REGARDING ALLOWABILITY OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80P OF THE IT ACT AFTER EXAMINING THE FULFILMENT OF OTHER CONDITIONS IN THAT REGARD. FOR READY REFERENCE WE REPRODUCE PARA NOS. 5 TO 11 OF THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER RENDERED IN THE CASE OF SIDDARTHA PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMITHA VS. ITO (SUPRA) BY SMC BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ON 26.07.2019. THESE PARAS ARE AS UNDER: 5. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI ACT 1997 ARE ALSO CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES WITHIN THE MEANING OF SEC.2(19) OF THE ACT AND THEREFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES WERE NOT JUSTIFIED IN DENYING THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED DR RELIED ON A DECISION OF THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S. MILLENNIUM CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. VS. ITO ITA NOS. 2606 & 2607/BANG/2017 IN WHICH THE TRIBUNAL FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF ITAT BANGALORE BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S. UDAYA SOUHARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. ITA NO.2831/BANG/2017 ORDER DATED 17.8.2018 IN WHICH THE ISSUE WHETHER SOUHARDA REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI ACT 1997 CAN BE REGARDED AS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ENTITLED TO BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S.80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT WAS REMANDED TO THE AO FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE THE AO AND CIT(A) HAVE ALREADY CONSIDERED THIS ISSUE IN THE LIGHT OF THE KARNATAKA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI ACT 1997 AND THEREFORE THIS ISSUE HAS TO BE DECIDED BY ME AND CANNOT BE REMANDED TO THE AO AS WAS CANVASSED BY THE REVENUE. 6. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. SEC.2(19) DEFINES COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE ACT AND THE SAME IS AS FOLLOWS: DEFINITIONS. 2. IN THIS ACT UNLESS THE CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES (19) 'CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY' MEANS A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1912 (2 ITA NO.130-131/BANG/2020 M/S.SAMRUDHA SOUHARDHA CR.CO-OP..LTD. 6 OF 1912) OR UNDER ANY OTHER LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE IN ANY STATE FOR THE REGISTRATION OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES: 7. AS CAN BE SEEN FROM THE AFORESAID DEFINITION OF CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY UNDER THE ACT ANY CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER ANY OTHER LAW OF ANY STATE FOR REGISTRATION OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS ALSO REGARDED AS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY UNDER THE ACT. SOUHARDAS ALSO OPERATE ON THE PRINCIPLE OF CO-OPERATION AND ADOPT THE PRINCIPLES OF CO-OPERATION. COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND CO-OPERATIVES ARE ALL FOUNDED ON THE PRINCIPLE OF COOPERATION. 8. SINCE THE BEGINNING OF MANKIND THE CONCEPT OF CO- OPERATION HAS BEEN THE FOUNDATION FOR HARMONIOUS EXISTENCE IN INDIA THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1912 REGULATED FORMATION MANAGEMENT WINDING UP AND OTHER SUPERVISION BY THE GOVERNMENT ETC. THIS ACT BECAME THE MODEL FOR THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS TO FORM THEIR OWN COOPERATIVE ACTS. POST-INDEPENDENCE VARIOUS STATE GOVERNMENTS FRAMED THEIR OWN INDEPENDENT COOPERATIVE ACTS AND THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ITS MULTI-STATE COOPERATIVE ACT. ACCORDINGLY KARNATAKA STATE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1959 (KSCS ACT 1959) REGULATES COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES IN THE STATE OF KARNATAKA. A PANCHAYAT A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY AND A SCHOOL FOR EVERY VILLAGE WERE CONSIDERED AS THE THREE PILLARS OF THE INTEGRATED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. AS TIME PASSED BY OTHER ASPECTS WERE INCLUDED INTO THE COOPERATIVE ACT THUS HERALDING THE RESURGENCE OF A NEW ERA IN COOPERATIVE MOVEMENT. THE STATE AND THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENTS WERE INVESTING MILLIONS OF RUPEES IN THE FORM OF SHARES GRANTS SUBSIDY CONTRIBUTIONS GOVERNMENT SUPPORT ETC. BUT THE EXPECTED RESULTS COULDNT BE ACHIEVED IN COOPERATIVE MOVEMENTS. THIS CONDITION CONTINUED ALMOST UNTIL EARLY 1980S. 9. KEEPING THIS IN MIND THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT SETUP A COMMITTEE UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF SHRI ARDHANARISHWARAN WHICH SUBMITTED ITS REPORT IN 1987. IT ATTRIBUTED THE FAILURE OF THE COOPERATIVE MOVEMENT TO THE EXCESSIVE INTERFERENCE OF THE GOVERNMENTS. IT IS ALSO TRUE THAT THE UNABATED PARTY POLITICS IN THE CO-OPERATIVE MOVEMENT IS ALSO A BIG HINDRANCE TO ITS PROGRESS. REALIZING THE VITAL ROLE OF THE COOPERATIVE MOVEMENT IN THE PROGRESS OF THE SOCIETY THE CENTRAL PLANNING ITA NO.130-131/BANG/2020 M/S.SAMRUDHA SOUHARDHA CR.CO-OP..LTD. 7 COMMISSION SET UP A COMMITTEE BY APPOINTING SHRI CHAUDARI BRAHMAPRAKASH AS ITS HEAD & WITH A TASK OF DRAFTING A MODEL COOPERATIVE ACT WHICH WILL PREVENT INTERFERENCE OF THE GOVERNMENTS. THIS COMMITTEE AFTER A DETAILED STUDY OF THE COOPERATIVE ACTS OF VARIOUS STATES DRAFTED A MODEL COOPERATIVE ACT IN 1991 AND CENTRAL GOVERNMENT RECOMMENDED THE STATE GOVERNMENTS TO ADOPT THIS. ACCORDINGLY IN 1997 A BILL ON PARALLEL COOPERATIVE ACT WAS TABLED IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE OF KARNATAKA. DEMANDING AN EARLY APPROVAL OF THIS BILL BY BOTH THE HOUSES OF KARNATAKA LEGISLATURE A COMMITTEE SOUHARDA SAMVARDHANA SAMITHI UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF JUSTICE RAMA JOIS CAME INTO EXISTENCE. IT WAS DUE TO THE COMBINED EFFORTS OF SAHAKARA BHARATHI KARNATAKA AND SOUHARDA SAMVARDHANA SAMITHI THE KARNATAKA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI ACT1997 (KSSA 1997) WAS PASSED IN THE LEGISLATURE. WITH THE CONSENT OF THE PRESIDENT OF INDIA IT WAS ENFORCED FROM JANUARY 2001. PREAMBLE TO THE ACT READS THUS:- AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR RECOGNITION ENCOURAGEMENT AND VOLUNTARY FORMATION OF CO- OPERATIVES BASED ON SELF-HELP MUTUAL AID WHOLLY OWNED MANAGED AND CONTROLLED BY MEMBERS AS ACCOUNTABLE COMPETITIVE SELF-RELIANT AND ECONOMIC ENTERPRISES GUIDED BY COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLES AND MATTERS CONNECTED THEREWITH; WHEREAS IT IS EXPEDIENT TO PROVIDE FOR RECOGNITION ENCOURAGEMENT AND VOLUNTARY FORMATION OF CO-OPERATIVES BASED ON SELF-HELP MUTUAL AID WHOLLY OWNED MANAGED AND CONTROLLED BY MEMBERS AS ACCOUNTABLE COMPETITIVE SELF-RELIANT AND ECONOMIC ENTERPRISES GUIDED BY COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLES AND FOR MATTERS CONNECTED THEREWITH; BE IT ENACTED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE LEGISLATURE IN THE FORTY-EIGHTH YEAR OF REPUBLIC OF INDIA AS FOLLOWS:- 10. THE SOUHARDA COOPERATIVES ENJOY FUNCTIONAL AUTONOMY IN DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THEIR BUSINESS PLANS CUSTOMER SERVICE ACTIVITIES ETC. BASED ON THE NEEDS OF THEIR MEMBERS. UNLIKE OTHER FORMS OF COOPERATIVES IN INDIA THE INTERFERENCE OF STATE / CENTRAL IN DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS OF SOUHARDA COOPERATIVES IS ALMOST MINIMAL. 11. THE ABOVE DISCUSSION WOULD SHOW THAT SOUHARDA CO- OPERATIVES ARE ALSO ONE FORM OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES REGISTERED UNDER A LAW IN FORCE IN THE STATE OF KARNATAKA FOR REGISTRATION OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES. THEREFORE THE CONCLUSION OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES THAT CO-OPERATIVE ITA NO.130-131/BANG/2020 M/S.SAMRUDHA SOUHARDHA CR.CO-OP..LTD. 8 SOCIETIES AND CO-OPERATIVES ARE DIFFERENT AND THAT CO- OPERATIVE REGISTERED AS SOUHARDA SAHAKARI CANNOT BE REGARDED AS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES IS UNSUSTAINABLE. WE THEREFORE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE ALLOWED DEDUCTION U/S.80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT AS THE GROUND ON WHICH THE SAME WAS DENIED TO THE ASSESSEE IS HELD TO BE INCORRECT. HOWEVER THE OTHER CONDITIONS FOR ALLOWING DEDUCTION U/S. 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED BY THE AO. I THEREFORE REMAND THE QUESTION OF ALLOWING DEDUCTION U/S. 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT TO THE AO EXCEPT THE ISSUE ALREADY DECIDED ABOVE. 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER I HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEES CLAIM REGARDING DEDUCTION U/S. 80P(2)(A)(I) CANNOT BE REJECTED ON THIS BASIS THAT ASSESSEE IS A SOUHARDA SAHAKARI AND THEREFORE CANNOT BE REGARDED AS A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY. BUT AFTER HOLDING SO I SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE AO FOR FRESH DECISION REGARDING ALLOWABILITY OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE IT ACT AFTER EXAMINING OTHER CONDITIONS FOR ALLOWING SUCH DEDUCTION BECAUSE THOSE CONDITIONS ARE NOT EXAMINED BY THE AO TILL NOW. I ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 8. SINCE THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE APPEALS UNDER CONSIDERATION IS IDENTICAL TO THAT OF THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SINDHU CREDIT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMITA (SUPRA) RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME I REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ADJUDICATION AFRESH ON SIMILAR LINE. 9. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 28 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 . SD/- ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE ; DATED : 28 TH FEBRUARY 2020. DEVADAS G* ITA NO.130-131/BANG/2020 M/S.SAMRUDHA SOUHARDHA CR.CO-OP..LTD. 9 COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A)-6 BENGALURU. 4. THE PR.CIT-6 BENGALURU. 5. THE DR ITAT BENGALURU. 6. GUARD FILE. ASST.REGISTRAR/ITAT BANGALORE