JANKALYAN NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA LTD,SATARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SATARA, SATARA
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that interest income earned by a cooperative society on deposits made out of surplus funds in cooperative and scheduled banks partakes the character of business income and is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. This decision followed a coordinate bench's ruling and the view of certain High Courts.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a cooperative credit society, claimed deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) for interest income earned on surplus funds invested in banks. The Assessing Officer denied this claim, stating the income was not eligible for deduction. The NFAC upheld the Assessing Officer's order.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether interest income earned by a cooperative society on surplus funds invested in banks is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(9)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- State Bank Of India v. CIT817 citing389 ITR 578 · 2016 · HC
- Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. v. ITO527 citing230 Taxmann 309 · 2015 · HC
- Vaveru Co-operative Rural Bank Ltd. v. CIT299 citing396 ITR 371 · 2017 · HC
- Mantola Co-operative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd. v. CIT242 citing50 Taxmann.com 278 · 2014 · HC · Read judgment
- CIT v. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd.192 citing389 ITR 68 · 2016 · HC
- CIT v. Southern Eastern Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd.170 citing390 ITR 524 · 2017 · HC
- CIT v. Punjab State Cooperative Federation of Housing Building Societies Ltd.151 citing11 Taxmann.com 448 · 2011 · HC
- PCIT v. Gunja Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd.111 citing147 Taxmann.com 518 · 2013 · HC
- Chennai Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. ITO100 citing148 Taxmann.com 17 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO
ORDER
PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM :
This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 29.03.2023 for the assessment year 2017-18.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a co- operative credit society registered under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The Return of Income for the assessment year 2017-18 was filed on 31.03.2018 disclosing total income of Rs.7,41,090/- after claiming deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) of Rs.41,84,244/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Satara (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 12.12.2019 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act at a total income of Rs.49,25,334/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer denied the claim for exemption of Rs.41,84,244/- u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) in respect of interest income on deposits made out of the surplus funds in cooperative bank and scheduled bank on the ground that the said income does not qualify for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) or 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the NFAC, who vide impugned order confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. When the appeal was called on, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing.
I heard the ld. Sr. DR and perused the material on record. The only issue in the present case is as to the allowability of exemption under the provisions of section 80P(2)(a)(i) in respect of interest income earned by a cooperative society from the scheduled banks. There is a cleavage of judicial opinion among several High Courts on the issue of eligibility of this kind of income for exemption u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Punjab State Cooperative Federation of Housing Building Societies Ltd. 11 taxmann.com 448, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of State Bank of India Vs. CIT 389 ITR 578 (Guj.), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mantola Co-operative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd. Vs. CIT 50 taxmann.com 278, the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd. 389 ITR 68 and the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Southern Eastern Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. 390 ITR 524 took a view that the income arising on the surplus invested in short term deposits and securities cannot be attributed to the activities of the society and, therefore, not eligible for exemption u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. However, the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. Vs. ITO (2015) 230 taxmann 309 (Kar.) and the Hon’ble Telangana and Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Vaveru Co-operative Rural Bank Ltd. v CIT [(2017) 396 ITR 371 took a view that such interest income is attributable to the activities of the society and, therefore, eligible for exemption u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Gunja Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., 147 taxmann.com 518 (Calcutta) and the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Chennai Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. ITO, 148 taxmann.com 17 (Madras). The Coordinate Bench of Pune Benches in the case of M/s. Ratnatray Gramin Bigar Sheti Sah. Pat Sanstha Maryadit Vs. ITO (ITA Nos.559/560/PUN/2018, dated 11-12-2018) taken view in favour of the assessee following the judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. (supra). Respectfully following the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal, I am of the considered opinion
More judgments on Section 80P(2)(a)(i)
- 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
- The Development Multipurpose Credit &… vs ITO Ward 2 (4), Porbandar, GujaratITA 458/RJT/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hislop College Employees Cooperative Credit… vs ITO Ward 2(3), NagpurITA 184/NAG/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Jijamata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari… vs ITO Ward -1, BhandraITA 102/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026