Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a credit cooperative society, claimed a deduction of Rs. 33,18,277/- under section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act for interest income earned on deposits with cooperative banks. The Assessing Officer (AO) and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] disallowed this deduction, arguing that cooperative banks are not cooperative societies and thus the interest was ineligible for deduction.
Held
Following precedents set by the Karnataka High Court and Sikkim High Court, the Tribunal held that interest income earned by a cooperative society from deposits with other cooperative banks is eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal directed the AO to allow the deduction of Rs. 33,18,277/-.
Key Issues
Whether a cooperative society is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act for interest income earned from deposits with other cooperative banks.
Sections Cited
Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 80P(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 56(i)(ccv) of the Banking Regulations Act, 1949
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE
Before: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nere Vibhag Nagari Sah. V Income Tax Officer, Patsanstha Maryadit, s Ward-5(4), Pune. 61, Mangalwar Peth, Tal – Bhor, Pune – 412206. PAN: AACAN2385C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by Shri Pramod S Shingte Revenue by Shri Ajitesh Kumar MEena – Addl.CIT Date of hearing 27/01/2026 Date of pronouncement 29/01/2026 आदेश/ ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2017-18 dated 31.07.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed under section 144 of the Act, dated 04.12.2019. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
“1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law lower authorities erred in passing ex-parte order and erred in deciding the issue only on the basis of material available with them, this action is being violative of principal of natural justice. Your appellant prays for granting opportunity of hearing before lower authorities Without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal, following grounds are also taken on merit,
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law learned AO erred in rejecting deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) for a sum of Rs. 33,18,280/- for entire book profit of appellant society without appreciating the fact that earning of interest is an integral part of society's business and appellant prays for allowing such deduction
3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Assessing Officer erred in treating a sum of Rs. 33,18,280/- being interest received on investment with other Co-Operative Bank as ineligible amount for calming deduction under section 80P (2)(a)(i) without appreciating the fact that earning of interest is an integral part of societies business and appeal and prays for allowing such deduction
4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Assessing Officer erred in treating the interest received from investment as income from other sources by rejecting appellant's contention that said interest income is integral part of business activity and your appellant prays for cancellation of Assessing officer's action
5. Without prejudice to above ground on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the law Learned Assessing Officer erred in not allowing 2 the deduction under section 80P(2)(d) on interest income received from [A] other co-operative society. Your appellants pray for allowing of the same.
6. Without prejudice to above ground. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in the law Learned Assessing Officer erred in treating entire interest income as interest income received from other co- operative society or bank without allowing deduction on account of interest expenses. Your appellant prays for such deduction Your appellant prays for deletion of entire addition. Your appellant craves for to add, alter amend, modify, delete any or all grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing in the interest of principle of natural justice”
Findings & Analysis : 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, as observed from Assessment Order, Assessee had filed Return of Income for A.Y.2017-18 on 26.10.2017 declaring total income at Rs.NIL after claiming deduction u/s.80P of Rs.39,47,585/-. Ld.AR filed copy of Return of Income and we have verified it. Assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny assessment. As per assessment record, Assessee has claimed the deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act on interest income earned on deposits with the PDCC Bank of Rs.33,18,277/-. During the assessment proceedings, Assessee submitted that Assessee is a Co-operative 3 Credit Society registered under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Assessee Society is providing credit and deposit facilities to its members. The society is engaged in activities of accepting deposits from its members and providing loans and advances to its members. During the assessment proceedings, assessee claimed that interest earned from such deposits is eligible for deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) as the interest earned of Rs.33,18,277/- on deposits with Pune District Central Cooperative Bank and other cooperative banks.
2.1 The Assessing Officer disallowed assessee’s claim for Chapter-VIA deduction under section 80P of the Act, of Rs.33,18,277/- on the ground that Co-operative Banks are not Co- operative Societies, hence, interest earned from Co-operative Banks is not eligible for deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order, Assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A) who upheld the assessment order.
Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), Assessee filed appeal before this Tribunal.
During the appellant proceedings, ld.AR filed copy of Income Tax Return filed by Assessee for A.Y.2017-18. As per the said Income Tax Return, Assessee has claimed deduction under section 80P of Rs.39,47,585/-.
In the Ground No.2 raised by the Assessee before us, Assessee has stated that it had claimed deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of Rs.33,18,280/-, we have verified the Return of Income filed by the Assessee and noted that Assessee had claimed deduction u/s.80P(2) of Rs.33,18,277/- in the Return of Income.
Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act is reproduced here under : “Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies. 80P. (1) Where, in the case of an assessee being a co-operative society, the gross total income includes any income referred to in sub-section (2), there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section, the sums specified in sub-section (2), in computing the total income of the assessee.
(2) The sums referred to in sub-section (1) shall be the following, namely :—
(a) in the case of a co-operative society engaged in—
(i) carrying on the business of banking or providing credit facilities to its members, or (ii) a cottage industry, or (iii) the marketing of agricultural produce grown by its members, or (iv) the purchase of agricultural implements, seeds, livestock or other articles intended for agriculture for the purpose of supplying them to its members, or (v) the processing, without the aid of power, of the agricultural produce of its members, or 5
(vi) the collective disposal of the labour of its members, or (vii) fishing or allied activities, that is to say, the catching, curing, processing, preserving, storing or marketing of fish or the purchase of materials and equipment in connection therewith for the purpose of supplying them to its members, the whole of the amount of profits and gains of business attributable to any one or more of such activities : Provided that in the case of a co-operative society falling under sub- clause (vi), or sub-clause (vii), the rules and bye-laws of the society restrict the voting rights to the following classes of its members, namely:— (1) the individuals who contribute their labour or, as the case may be, carry on the fishing or allied activities; (2) the co-operative credit societies which provide financial assistance to the society; (3) the State Government; xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (d) in respect of any income by way of interest or dividends derived by the co-operative society from its investments with any other co-operative society, the whole of such income;
The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Totagar’s Co-operative Sale Society [2017] 392 ITR 74 vide order dated 05.01.2017 has held as under : Quote “5. The learned counsel for the Revenue has pleaded that two substantial questions of law are raised in the present appeal, namely, '1. Whether the learned Tribunal was justified in deleting the additions made by the Assessing Authority being the disallowed deduction claimed u/S. 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act and in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court with regard to the same exact assessee as the present one, namely, The Totgars Co- operative Sale Society Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer in Civil AppealNos.1622 to 1629/2010 decided by the Apex Court on 08.02.2010 or not? 2. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in not following the decision rendered by the 6 Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 1622 of 2010, wherein the Apex Court has to be held that the words used in Section 80P "the whole of the amount of profits and gains of business" emphasise that the income in respect of which deduction is sought must constitute the operational income and not the other income which accrues to the society and as such interest earned on funds which are not required for business purposes falls under the category of "other income" taxable under the Income Tax Act?' ………………………..
The issue whether a Co-operative Bank is considered to be a Co-operative Society is no longer res integra. For the said issue has been decided by the ITAT itself in different cases. Moreover the word "Co-operative Society" are the words of a large extent, and denotes a genus, whereas the word "Co-operative Bank" is a word of limited extent, which merely demarcates and identifies a particular species of the genus Co-operative Societies. Co- Operative Society can be of different nature, and can be involved in different activities; the Co-operative Society Bank is merely a variety of the Co-operative Societies. Thus the Co-operative Bank which is a species of the genus would necessarily be covered by the word "Co-operative Society".
Furthermore, even according to Section 56(i)(ccv) of the Banking Regulations Act, 1949, defines a primary Co-Operative Society bank as the meaning of Co-Operative Society. Therefore, a Co-operative Society Bank would be included in the words 'Co- operative Society' 10. Admittedly, the interest which the assessee respondent had earned was from a Co-operative Society Bank. Therefore, according to Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the I.T. Act, the said amount of interest earned from a Co-operative Society Bank would be deductable from the gross income of the Co-operative Society in order to assess its total income. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was not justified in denying the said deduction to the assessee respondent.
The learned counsel has relied on the case of Totgars Co- operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO [2010] 322ITR 283/188 Taxman 282 (SC). However, the said case dealt with the interpretation, and the deduction, which would be applicable under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T. Act. For, in the present case the interpretation that is required is of Section 80P(2)(d) of the I.T. Act and not Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T. Act. Therefore, 7 the said judgment is inapplicable to the present case. Thus, neither of the two substantial questions of law canvassed by the learned counsel for the Revenue even arise in the present case.
For the reasons stated above, this Court does not find any merit in the present appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed.”Unquote.(emphasis supplied) 8. The Hon’ble Sikkim High Court in the decision of [2025] 181 taxmann.com 494 (SIKKIM)Sikkim State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax vide order dated 10.12.2025 has held as under : Quote.“4.When we took up the matter on 12thNovember, 2025, the following substantial questions of law were framed:-
"1. Whether the learned Tribunal misinterpreted section 80P(4), which only bars cooperative banks from claiming deductions on their own income and wrongly applied it to deny section 80P(2)(d) deductions to the Appellant, being a non-bank cooperative society, in respect of interest received from cooperative banks?
Whether the learned Tribunal correctly applied the ratio in Totgars' Cooperative Sale Society Ltd. (322ITR 283 (SC)), which concerned section 80P(2)(a)(i) and retained members' funds shown as liability to deny deductions under section 80P(2)(d), when the facts and statutory provisions in the present case are materially different?" ……………………. …………………….
We are, therefore, of the view that in the facts of the instant case, the assessee is entitled to claim deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.”Unquote.
9. Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and Hon’ble Sikkim High Court has held that interest earned by Co-operative Society from 8 deposits kept with Co-operative Banks is eligible for deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act.
Thus, whether a co-operative Society is eligible for deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act, on the interest earned from Co-operative Bank has been decided in favour of assessee by Hon’ble High Courts.
11. Respectfully, following the Hon’ble High Court(supra), we direct the Assessing Officer to allow deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act, to Assessee of Rs.33,18,277/-. Accordingly, Ground No.2 raised by the Assessee is allowed.
12. Since we have decided the main ground, remaining grounds become academic, accordingly, dismissed as unadjudicated.
In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 29 January, 2026. VINAY BHAMORE Dr.DIPAK P. RIPOTE JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पपणे / Pune; ददिधंक / Dated : 29 Jan, 2026/ SGR 9