Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a Co-operative Credit Society, filed its return for AY 2017-18 disclosing NIL income. The Assessing Officer denied deduction u/s 80P(2) and added back Rs.24,86,110/- as unexplained money deposited during demonetization. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee is a Co-operative Credit Society and the money deposited was by its members. Additional evidences were submitted by the assessee. The Tribunal found that these evidences need to be examined by the Assessing Officer.
Key Issues
Whether the cash deposited during demonetization by members of a Co-operative Credit Society can be treated as unexplained money and whether the deduction u/s 80P(2) is admissible.
Sections Cited
80P(2), 69A, 143(2), 143(3), 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey
order
: February 05, 2026 ORDER
Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 03.04.2025 of the NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”) passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2010–11.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society, carrying on business of sales of fertilisers, pesticides, seeds, providing loans to members and registered under West Bengal Co-operative Society Act, 2006. The assessee filed its Income Tax Return for the assessment year 2017-18 by disclosing a total income at Rs NIL. The case was selected for Scrutiny under CASS and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) by denying deduction of Rs.29,43,810/- u/s 80P(2) of the Act and also added back cash deposited Rs.24,86,110/- out of total cash deposited Rs.2,10,09,000/- during the period of demonetization from 09-11-2016 to 30-12-2016 as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act.
Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) wherein the ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by the sustaining the above additions.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before us. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is a Co- operative Credit Society which gives credit to its members and the assessee-Society is not the owner of the money, which only belongs to its members and same is retained by the assessee as its custodian who had deposited cash during the demonetization period in old currency notes. The ld. AR also submits that the Assessing Officer has not accepted the submissions of the assessee and the documents filed before the lower authorities. He further submits that the appeal may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer by directing to admit additional evidences which have been filed before the Tribunal.
The Ld. DR did not make any objection to the above submission of the ld. AR.
We have considered the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties and perused the material available on record. We find that the assessee is a Co-operative Credit Society which gives credit to its members and it accepts deposits from its members and the cash/money deposited by its members is further deposited by the Society in its bank account and the assessee-Society deposited cash during the demonetization period in old currency notes. The Assessing Officer did not accept the submission or evidences filed by the assessee and made addition of Rs.24,86,110/- in respect of cash deposited out of total cash deposited Rs.2,10,09,000/- during the period of demonetization u/s 69A of the Act and also denied deduction u/s 80P(2) of Rs.29,43,810/-. We find that before us, the assessee has submitted additional evidences to substantiate its claim vide paper-book running from page 1 to 41, which are as under:
6.1 We note that the above additional evidences are required to be examined at the end of the Assessing Officer, therefore, the appeal is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to admit the aforesaid additional evidences under Rule 46A of the Rules and pass a fresh order in accordance with law keeping in mind all the documentary evidences filed by the assessee 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 5th February, 2026.