SHREE AGGAR DHARA CO-OP TRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-39(5), NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the issue to the Assessing Officer. The AO is directed to consider the assessee's submissions and allow the deduction under Section 80P if found in order.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a cooperative society, claimed deduction under Section 80P for providing thrift and credit facilities to its members. The CPC disallowed this claim during intimation under Section 143(1), which was upheld by the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
Whether the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P by the CPC was justified. Whether the assessee, as a cooperative society providing credit facilities, is eligible for the deduction.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT
O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM:
This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (INFAC), Delhi, dated 21.07.2022, pertaining to the assessment year 2018-19. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
“1. That the Ld CIT(A) erred in law and in facts in upholding the action of Assistant Director of Income tax, CPC (Ld. AO) which disallowed the deduction u/s 80P amounting to Rs. 8,29,1S8 and thereby determined a total tax demand of Rs. 3,06,410 on the appellant.
2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in disregarding the fact that the status of appellant is “cooperative society engaged in providing thrift/Credit facilities to its members” and that this status in itself is enough to be eligible to claim deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 3. The appellant further craves leave to add, amend, alter, delete, rescind, forgo or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal either before or during the course of the appellate proceedings.”
Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that for A.Y. 2018-19 the assessee filed its return of income on 05.06.2018. The Centralized Processing Center, Bengaluru issued intimation u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 12.07.2019. Thereby it made adjustment of Rs. 8,29,190/-, disallowing the claim of deduction. Aggrieved against this the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(Appeals), who after giving opportunity to the assessee sustained the adjustment made by the CPC. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the authorities below have not considered the provisions of law. The learned counsel submitted that the assessee is a cooperative society and is engaged in the business of providing thrift/credit facilities to its members. It claimed deduction u/s 80P of the Act amounting to Rs. 8,79,188/- being net gains realized by the assessee from providing credit and banking facilities to its members. Learned counsel submitted that the assessee rectified its return of income in pursuance of steps suggested by the CPC but still claim of the assessee was rejected.
On the contrary, learned DR opposed the submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. He contended that the assessee failed to support its claim by relevant evidences.
I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The only issue is whether the Centralized Processing Center U/s 143(1) of the Act was justified in making the adjustment declining the claim of deduction u/s 80P. Considering the totality of the facts and in view of the fact that before the learned CIT(Appeals) there was no effective representation by the assessee, I set aside the impugned order and restore the issue to the file of Assessing Officer to consider the submissions of the assessee and if found in order allow deduction u/s 80P of the Act as per law. Grounds raised in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.
Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open court on 8th Feb. 2023.
More judgments on Section 80P
- Shree Bandharda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd… vs Income Tax Officer Ward -4, JunagadhITA 881/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Duddukuru Primary Agricultural Cooperative… vs ITO, Ward - 1, TadepalligudemITA 258/VIZ/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Jijamata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari… vs ITO Ward -1, BhandraITA 102/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Shri Na vs Ari Khedut Sahkari Society Ltd…ITA 362/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Tyre Center vs. The Superintendent Of CGSTAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026