KADALUMDI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KADALUNDI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), KOZHIKODE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) for interest and dividend income from co-operative banks, and under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) for income derived from business exclusively with members. The matter was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a primary agricultural society engaged in banking, claimed deductions under Section 80P(2)(d) and 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) disallowed these claims, relying on Supreme Court and High Court judgments.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee, a cooperative society engaged in banking, is eligible for deductions under Section 80P(2)(d) and 80P(2)(a)(i) on its income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show listHide 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.
- Pr. CIT v. Totagars1,074 citing395 ITR 611 · 2017 · HC
- Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT999 citing431 ITR 1 · 2021 · SC
- Totgar's Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO486 citing188 Taxmann 282 · 2010 · SC
- PCIT v. Peroorkada Service Co-op. Bank Ltd.208 citing442 ITR 141 · 2022 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav
O R D E R
Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM :
The present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 22ndSeptember, 2023 having DIN& Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1056436817(1) dated 22nd September, 2023 and relates to the assessment year 2020- 2021.
The facts giving rise to the filing of the present appeal are that the assessee is a primary agricultural society and engaged in the business of banking. It has filed its return of income after claiming deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) and 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee by relying upon the judgment of the
Aggrieved with the order of the A.O., the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A), however, the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee relying on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Pr.CIT v. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society 395 ITR 611 (Kar.).
Still aggrieved, the assessee has come up in appeal before us and contended that the assessee is entitled for deduction of 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest and dividend income and deduction of 80P(2)(a)(i) in respect of other business income. The learned Counsel for the assessee strongly relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of PCIT v. Peroorkada Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.and Vilappil Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.reported in 442 ITR 141 (Ker.). The assessee also relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. reported in 431 ITR 1 (SC).
5 The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
After hearing the parties, we are of the considered view that the assessee is entitled for deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) in respect of interest income and dividend income earned from co-operative bank as held in the case of Peroorkada Service Co- operative Bank Ltd.(supra). The assessee would also be entitled . Kadalundi SC.B Limited. for the deduction of section 80(P)(2a)(i) in respect of such income which is derived from the business of cooperative society exclusively with the members of the society. Therefore, we restore this matter to the file of the A.O. with a direction to decide the issue afresh after considering the judgment of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court and Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. (supra).We also direct the assessee to produce proper bifurcation of the income earned which is eligible for deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) and 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above.
Order pronounced on this 29th day of November, 2024.
More judgments on Section 80P(2)(d)
- Duddukuru Primary Agricultural Cooperative… vs ITO, Ward - 1, TadepalligudemITA 258/VIZ/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- S R P Jutha 13 Rajkot VI and Gr S Ma, Rajkot vs ITO WD 1(2)(1) Rajkot, RajkotITA 951/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Poonam Chambers B Wing Commercial Premises… vs Deputy Commissioner Income Tax, MumbaiITA 7044/MUM/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2021-2022
- Poonam Chambers B Wing Commercial Premises… vs Deputy Commissioner Income Tax, MumbaiITA 7043/MUM/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Suvarnakarara Co-Operative Society Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, KarwarITA 210/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- Prashanti Das (M/S. Panchamukhi Enterprises) vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026