Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur
Kota Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd., ... vs Acit, Kota on 20 December, 2016
vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR
Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL;] ds le{k
BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 650/JP/2016
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2007-08
Kota Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas cuke A.C.I.T.,
Bank Ltd., Plot No. 3, Behind Vs. Circle-1,
Income Tax Office, Rawatbhata Kota.
Road, Kota-324009.
LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAAAK 0720 G
vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent
fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None.
jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Poonam Rai.
lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 19/12/2016
mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 20/12/2016
vkns'k@ ORDER
PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 15/02/2016 passed by the ld CIT(A), Ajmer for the A.Y. 2007-08.
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in banking business and provides loans and advance for agricultural development such as purchase of engine, tractor, crop loan and other related activities as per bank norms. The assessee debited an amount of Rs. 26896000/- as provision for interest on NPA (ashodya byaj pravdan).
2 ITA 650/JP/2016_ Kota Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd. Vs. ACIT The Assessing Officer asked the assessee as to how the interest on NPA is allowable. The assessee did not furnish any satisfactory explanation and the Assessing Officer added the same and after adjusting the lost income, it was assessed at Rs. 6,18,649/-.
3. Being aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A), who had confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer by holding as under:-
The assessee has claimed that appellant is a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank, therefore, the appellant was entitled for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i). In support of its claim, the appellant has filed copies of "by-laws". The clause-1([k) of the by-laws provides as under:
"¼[k½ cSd a dk dk;Z{ks= bu mifu;eksa ds vUrxZr jktLo fjdkMZ ds vuqlkj dksVk ftys ds ykMiqjk] bVkok] lqYrkuiqj] lkxksn] pspV rglhy ds leLr xzkeksa ,oa <+kf.k;ksas rd lhfer gksxkA"
From the above by-laws, it is clear that the area of operation of the appellant co-operative society (primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank) was confined to five taluks. As per Clause (b) of Explanation to Sub-section 4 of Section 80P "primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank" means a society having its area of operation confined to a taluk and the principal object of which is to provide for long-term credit for agricultural and rural development activities". As the appellant society is not 3 ITA 650/JP/2016_ Kota Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd. Vs. ACIT having its area of operation confined to a taluk (because admittedly, the area of operation of the appellant society is five taluks), therefore, in view of the Clause (b) of Explanation to Sub-section 4 of Section 80P, I am of considered view that the provisions of section 80P are not applicable to the appellant society because in view of the meaning of primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank given in Clause (b) of Explanation to Sub- section 4 of Section 80P, the appellant company is not a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank. Hence, it is held that no deduction u/s 80P is admissible to the appellant.
Further the appellant has also argued that, if no deduction is allowed to it u/s 80P, then its claim for deduction for provision for interest on NPA of Rs. 2,68,96,000/- should be allowed under Clause (viia) of Sub-section 1 of Section 36. This argument of the appellant is also not acceptable because the assessee admittedly is a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank. Only for the purpose of allowing deduction u/s 80P, it has been held to be not a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank because it has violated the condition of having its area of operation confined to a taluk (as provided in Clause (b) of Explanation to Sub-section 4 of Section 80P). The Explanation to Sub-section 4 of section 80P starts with "for the purpose of this Sub-section". Therefore it is held that though the appellant is primary co-operative 4 ITA 650/JP/2016_ Kota Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd. Vs. ACIT agricultural and rural development bank but only for the purpose of Sub-section 4 of Section 80P, it is held not to be a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank. Accordingly, it is held that no deduction u/s 80P of 36(1)(viia) is admissible to the appellant. This ground of appeal is dismissed.
4. Now the assessee is in appeal before me. At the time of hearing, none was attended on behalf of the assessee. However, the ld. DR was heard.
5. I have heard the ld. DR and perused the material available on the record. From perusal of the Form No. 36, it transpires that, instead of grounds of appeal, only "addition should be deleted" is mentioned. Thus, the ground itself is very vague and which is not as per ITAT Rules.
Considering all the aspects including the vague grounds of appeal taken by the assessee, I find no merit in the appeal of assessee and the same stands dismissed.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 20/12/2016.
Sd/-
¼Hkkxpan½ (BHAGCHAND) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 20th December, 2016 5 ITA 650/JP/2016_ Kota Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd. Vs. ACIT *Ranjan vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf'kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Kota Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd., Kota.
2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ACIT, Circle-1, Kota.
3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT
4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A)
5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur
6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 650/JP/2016) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar