CO OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD, SIMBHAOLI, SAMBHAOLI, HAPUR,SAMBHAOLI, HAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3)(4), HAPUR, HAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7027/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 January 2026AY 2017-2018Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The lower authorities refused Section 80P deduction on interest income from term deposits, short-term deposits, and savings bank accounts, treating it as income from "other" sources. The Tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court decision in Commissioner of Income-Tax, West Bengal-I vs. Vegetable Products Ltd., allowed the assessee's ground.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed two appeals against the orders of the Addl./JCIT(A) for AY 2016-17 and 2017-18. The appeals arose from assessment orders under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. A delay of 3 days in filing the appeals was condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether interest income from deposits and savings bank accounts can be considered as derived from eligible business activity for Section 80P deduction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 80P(2),Section 80P

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Ms. Gurneet Kaur, Adv
Hearing: 20.01.2026Pronounced: 20.01.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 7026/Del/2025
ITA No. 7027/Del/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member : Asstt. Year: 2016- Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Vs Co-operative Cane Development Income Tax Officer, Union Ltd. Sambhaoli, Ward-2(3)(4), Hapur, Uttar Pradesh-245207 Hapur, U.P. -245207 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAATC5138R Assessee by : Ms. Gurneet Kaur, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 20.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 20.01.2026 ORDER

These assessee’s twin appeals in & 7027/Del/2025 for Assessment Years 2016-17 and 2017-18, arise against the Addl./JCIT(A), Thane’s DIN & order Nos. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1079243808(1) & 1079243999(1) both dated 04.08.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.

3.

Delay of 3 days in filing of both these appeals are condoned in the larger interest of justice in light of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

Co-operative Cane Development Union Ltd. Sambhaoli 4. It transpires during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have refused section 80P deduction to the assessee qua it’s income derived from term deposits, short- term deposits, and interest on savings bank accounts amounting to Rs.24,19,257/- (A.Y. 2016-17) and Rs.30,23,293/- (A.Y. 2017-18); assessment year wise, respectively, in assessment order(s) dated 30.12.2018 and 15.12.2019 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

5.

Both the learned lower authorities hold that such an interest income as in the present instance received from term deposits, short-term deposits, and interest on savings bank accounts could not be held as “derived” from an eligible business activity under section 80P(2); and, therefore, the same deserves to be assessed as income from “other” sources only.

6.

Mr. Kumar also quotes M/s. The Totgars' Cooperative Sale Society Ltd. Vs. ITO (2010) 322 ITR 283 (SC) deciding the very issue in the Revenue’s favour. The assessee on the other hand draws strong support from the Vaveru Co-operative Rural Bank Ltd. vs. CIT [(2017) 396 ITR 371 (AP)] wherein their lordships have rejected the Revenue’s identical stand. Be that as it may,

Co-operative Cane Development Union Ltd. Sambhaoli the fact remains that no valuable guidance has come from hon’ble jurisdictional high court at Allahabad on the instant issue. That being the case, we hereby quote Commissioner of Income-Tax, West Bengal-I vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. [1973] 88 ITR 192 (SC)to conclude that the view supporting the assessee’s case in such an instance has to be adopted; to accept the instant sole substantive ground against the department, in very terms. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.

7.

No other ground or argument has been pressed before us.

More judgments on Section 80P(2)

All 332 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P(2) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →