Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a cooperative society managing commercial premises, earned interest from deposits with a cooperative bank and claimed deduction under section 80P(2)(d). This claim was rejected by the CPC and later by the CIT(A). The assessee's appeals before the ITAT were heard ex parte as no one appeared for the assessee.
Held
The Tribunal held that interest earned from deposits placed with a cooperative bank is an allowable deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. This is based on the Supreme Court's ruling that cooperative banks are indeed cooperative societies and not banks operating under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949.
Key Issues
Whether interest earned from a cooperative bank is allowable as a deduction under section 80P(2)(d) for a cooperative society, especially in light of section 80P(4).
Sections Cited
143(1), 154, 250, 80P(2)(d), 80P(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE & SHRI JAGADISH
Matruchhaya Commercial vs ITO Ward 125(1), Mumbai Premises Co-OP Society Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 504, 378-380 Narshi Natha Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Street Masjid Bunder, Mumbai-400009 PAN:AADAM4079R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : None Respondent by : Shri Surendra Mohan (SR. DR) Date of hearing : 11/03/2026 Date of pronouncement : 13/03/2026 O R D E R Per Bench : Both the appeals of the same assessee are preferred against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, ADDL/JCIT (A) Kochi [for brevity the “Ld. CIT(A)”], order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (for brevity ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2020-21 to 2021-22 date of order 31.10.2025. The impugned orders emanated from the order of the CPC Bengaluru Matruchhaya Commercial Premises Co-Op Society Ltd. (for brevity the ‘Ld. AO’) order passed under section 154 of the Act date of order 29.06.2022 for A.Y. 2020-21 and 17.02.2022 for 2021-22.
When the appeals were called for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee to represent the case nor was any application for adjournment filed. On perusal of record we find that the assessee’s case was related to disallowance of interest received from Cooperative Bank u/sec. 80(P)(2)(d) of the Act. In view of the above circumstance and considering the nature of dispute we proceed to dispose of appeal to ex parte qua for the assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and on the basis of material available on record.
Both the appeals pertain from the same assessee, involving similar issues, arising out of same factual matrix. These appeals were heard together as a matter of convenience and are being decided by way of this consolidated order. So, with the consent of Ld. DR is taken as lead case and the decision rendered therein shall apply mutatis mutandis to other appeal before us.
We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. The assessee is a Cooperative society registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act and engaged in the activity by managing maintaining commercial premises. During the impugned assessment year the assessee filed the return and declaring income in accordance with the Income Tax Act. During the impugned financial year the assessee earned interest from deposit placed with Cooperative Bank which comes amount to Rs.1,41,392/- and claim deduction u/sec. 80(P)(2)(d) of the Act. The assessee’s return was processed u/sec. 143(1) and the claim u/sec. 80P(2)(d) was duly rejected by the CPC. The Matruchhaya Commercial Premises Co-Op Society Ltd. assessee filed a petition u/sec. 154 before the CPC but the said petition was also rejected. Being aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A).
On perusal of the record we find that the assessee had placed the deposited in the Cooperative Bank. The interest earned from Cooperative Bank was claimed as deduction u/sec 80(P)(2)(d) of the Act. The said issue is no more res integra. It is noted in the ground of appeal
that the said claim of deduction is duly allowed by Coordinate Bench of ITAT Mumbai in the other cases. The assessee respectfully placed reliance on the order of Coordinate Bench of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Kumkum Kavita Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. vs ITO, date of pronouncement 28.06.2024. Where the Bench observed that the deduction u/sec. 80P(2)(d) for related to the interest earned from Cooperative Bank is allowable deduction.
6. The Ld. DR argued and stands in favor of the order of revenue authorities.
7. We heard the submission of the Ld. DR and perused the documents available on record. In our considered view the issue is well settled by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The revenue has restricted the claim of deduction U/s 80P(2)(d) in pursuance of section 80P(4) of the Act and the cooperative bank is not considered as cooperative society. Respectful reliance was placed on the order of PCIT Vs Annasaheb Patil Mathadi Kamgar Sahakari Pathpedi Limited, , reported in (2023) 150 taxmann.com 173 (SC) and Kerala State Co-Operative Agricultural And Rural Development Bank Ltd. KSCARDB vs. Assessing Officer, reported in [2023] 458 ITR 384 (SC) where the Hon’ble Apex Court categorically stated that cooperative bank is the cooperative society and not acted as Bank under Banking Regulation Act,1949. We note the order of the coordinate bench of