Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore
M/S. Karnataka State Co-Operative ... vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(4), ... on 5 January, 2018
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
BANGALORE BENCH "A"
BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
S.P No.305/Bang/2017
(In ITA No.2801/Bang/2017)
(Asst. Year 2014-15)
Karnataka State Co-operative Agricultural
& Rural Development Bank Ltd.,
P.B No.1811, Fort Tippu Sultan
Palace Road, M.G Road, Chamarajapet,
Bengaluru. . Appellant
Vs.
The Income-tax Officer,
Ward-5(2)(4),
Bengaluru. . Respondent
Appellant by : Shri P Dinesh, Advocate
Respondent by : Shri B.R Ramesh, JCIT
Date of Hearing : 5-1-2018
Date of Pronouncement : -1-2018
ORDER
PER SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
This stay petition ('SP') arises out of the appeal in ITA No.2801/Bang/2017 for asst. year 2014-15.
2. Briefly stated, facts of the case relevant for disposal of this stay petition is as under:-
S.P No.305/B/17 2 2.1 The assessee, a co-operative credit society, filed its return of income for asst. year 2014-15 on 12/2/2014 declaring NIL income after claiming deduction of Rs.10,92,63,302/- u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). The Assessing Officer ('AO') was of the view that assessee was engaged in banking business and therefore in view of the provisions of sec. 80P(4) of the Act was not entitled for the deduction claimed by it u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. In that view of the matter, the AO completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 26/12/2016, wherein the assessee's income was determined at Rs.10,76,56,783/-
and thereby raising a demand of Rs.4,70,96,160/-. On appeal, the ld CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal vide order dated 15/9/2017 and upheld the AO's view in the matter placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Citizen Co- operative Society Ltd., Hyderabad Vs. ACIT. From the details before us, it appears that so far the assessee has only paid taxes amounting to Rs.50,00,000/- out of Rs.4,70,96,160/- total demand raised.
3.1 Before us, in its submissions the assessee has contended as under:-
"7. It is submitted that the appellant believes in good faith that it has a good case on merits. The appellant being a creation of State Govt., believes that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of Jurisdictional High court and since it has no transactions with the Non- members, nor is there any observation by the ITO to this S.P No.305/B/17 3 effect in the assessment order, the decision of Supreme court rather helps the appellant than the dept.
8. In view of the above, it is humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the A.O. to not to proceed with the recovery of disputed demand and further, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay further proceedings of ANNEXUREC till the disposal of the appeal, in the interest of justice."
The ld AR pleaded that the assessee would face financial hardship if required to pay the outstanding demand but could not establish such difficulty before us. The ld AR expressed inability to pay the outstanding taxes of Rs.4,20,96,160/-, but pleaded for early hearing.
3.2 The ld DR for Revenue vehemently opposed the assessee's application seeking stay on recovery of demand. 3.3. We have heard the rival contentions of both parties and perused the record before us. Out of the total demand of Rs.4,70,96,160/- raised, the assessee has so far paid taxes of only Rs.50,00,000/- and therefore the outstanding tax demand stands at Rs.4,20,96,160/-. Taking into account the facts of the case, the balance of convenience and also that the assessee has not been able to establish financial hardship, we are of the view that this is not a fit case for grant of stay on recovery of outstanding demand and accordingly reject this stay petition put forth by the assessee. The appeal in ITA No.2801/Bang/2017 is fixed for hearing on 27/3/2018. Since the S.P No.305/B/17 4 date of hearing was announced in open court, in the presence of both parties, no notices for hearing will be issued separately.
5. In the result, the assessee's stay petition for asst. year 2014-15 is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 5th January, 2018.
Sd/- Sd/-
(SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) (JASON P BOAZ)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Bangalore
Dated : 5/1/2018
Vms
Copy to :1. The Assessee
2. The Revenue
3.The CIT concerned.
4.The CIT(A) concerned.
5.DR
6.GF By order
Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Bangalore.