DD 122 HARUR AND PRPATTI TK GOVT. H AND HR SEC SCHOOL EMP COOP T&C SOCIETY,DHARMAPURI vs. ITO, WARD-1,, DHARMAPURI

The Assessee raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case the order of first appellate authority dated 26.11.2025 in dismissing the appeal of the appellant is bad in law and is not legally justified. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the First Appellate Authority is not justified in sustaining the order of the AO, 28.06.2022. The notice u/s 143(2) of the Act has been issued in an invalid format in violation to the CBDT instruction no. F. No. 225/157/2017/ITA-II dated 23.06.2017 and accordingly, the assessment order passed consequently is void-ab-initio and bad in law. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the first appellate authority is not justified in sustaining the order of the AO, Where the first appellate authority has denied the deduction claimed by the appellant society in terms of section 80P of the Act on a blatant mistake made by the CIT(A) that the society is registered on 23.11.2023 instead of 24.11.1983. The CIT(A) on accepting the position of society and submissions filed by the appellant society, has rejected the claim made based on above blatant mistake whereas copy of registration of society is itself reproduced in the appellate order dated 26.11.2025 in page no.14. On rectification of same mistake, affects the appellate proceedings in its entirety. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the first appellate authority is not justified in sustaining the order of the AO, where the AO has made an disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80P of the Act amounting to Rs.93,18,435/- on the sole reason that the appellant society is not eligible to claim deduction under the above section. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the first appellate authority is not justified in sustaining the order of the AO, Where the AO has made an disallowance amounting to Rs.1,86,772/-u/s 40A(7). 6. In view of the above grounds and other submissions to be made at the time of Appeal hearing. the order U/S 250 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),NFAC may be cancelled and justice rendered.”

Briefly the facts of the case are that the Appellant is a Co-operative Society registered under the Tamilnadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983. The appellant society is formed with objects of providing credit facilities to

Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the ld.CIT(A), who vide impugned order confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer by holding that the appellant society was not registered. Therefore, it does not meet statutory definition of ‘Co-operative Society’ under Tamilnadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 and further proceeded to hold that even if the appellant society is considered to be Co-operative Society, the income earned on investments made with State Bank of India does not qualify for deduction u/s.80P(2)(i)(a) or 80P(2)(d) of the Act, accordingly, dismissed the appeal.

The ld.Counsel submits that the appellant is a Co-operative Society duly registered under Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 and it was registered

On the other hand, ld.Sr.DR vehemently opposed the above submissions and submits that the appellant had failed to prove its status as a Co-operative Society. Therefore, the Assessing Officer had rightly denied the claim for deduction u/s.80P of the Income Tax Act.

We heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The issue that arises for our consideration is whether the appellant society is eligible to claim deduction u/s.80P of the Income Tax Act or not!. The appellant made a claim that the Assessing Officer denied the claim for deduction u/s.80P of the Act solely on the ground that the appellant had failed to discharge the onus of proving status of Primary Agricultural Co- operative Society. Before us, the appellant filed copy of the proceedings whereby, the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Society registered the

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 6th May, 2026.