THE PULLOOT SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. 611,PULLOOR vs. ITO, WARD-2(5), THRISSUR
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 80P as it is registered as a primary agricultural co-operative society. The AO's denial based on it being a co-operative bank was incorrect.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a co-operative society, did not file a regular return of income for AY 2008-09. Upon receiving a notice under Section 148, it filed a return claiming deduction under Section 80P. The AO disallowed this deduction, holding the assessee to be a co-operative bank hit by Section 80P(4).
What were the issues?
Whether a co-operative society, registered as a primary agricultural co-operative society, is eligible for deduction under Section 80P when it was initially considered a co-operative bank hit by Section 80P(4).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 80P,Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 80A(5),Section 80P(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)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.
- Nileshwar Rangekallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham v. CIT31 citing152 Taxmann.com 347 · 2023 · HC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 08.03.2024 for Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a co-operative society registered under the Kerala State Co-operative Societies Act. The assessee had not filed regular return of income for AY 2008-09. Subsequently the Assessing Officer (AO) had issued a notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on 37.03.2015. In response to the notice u/s. 148 of the Act return of income was filed claiming deduction of Rs. 8,20,557/- u/s. 80P of the Act. Against the said return of income assessment was completed by the AO vide order dated 04.03.2016 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act at a total income of Rs. 43,76,197/- by disallowing the claim for Pulloot Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. deduction u/s. 80P of the Act by holding that the assessee is not a co-operative society but a co-operative bank hit by the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 80P of the Act.
Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO placing reliance on section 80A(5) of the Act holding that the assessee has not made a claim in the return of income. Therefore, deduction u/s. 80P cannot be allowed placing reliance on the decision of the hon'ble jurisdictional high court in the case of Neleshwar Rangekallu Chethy Vyavasaya Thozhilai Sahakarana Sangham vs. CIT [2023] 152 taxmann.com 347 (Ker.)
Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. When the appeal was called on nobody attended despite due service of notice of hearing. Therefore after hearing the learned Sr. DR, I proceeded to dispose of the appeal as under.
The learned Sr. DR placed reliance on the decision of the coordinate bench in the case of Kadavalur Service Co-op. Bank Ltd., ITA No. 637/Coch/2023.
The only issue that arises for my consideration is whether or not the assessee co-operative society is eligible for deduction u/s. 80P of the Act. Admittedly the assessee society is formed with the objective of accepting deposits from its members and lending money to its members. There is no dispute that the assessee did not file return of income. However, the assessee had filed return of income in response to the notice u/s. 148 making claim in the return of income for deduction u/s. 80P of the Act. The AO had denied the claim for deduction u/s. 80P solely on the ground that the assessee is not a primary agricultural co-operative society but a co-operative bank Pulloot Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. hit by the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 80P of the Act. It is undisputed fact that the assessee is registered as a primary agricultural co-operative society as per the certificate issued by the Registrar of Kerala State Co-operative Societies Act and it does not hold any banking licence to carry out banking business. Therefore, it is not open to the AO to engage into a fact finding enquiry that it is a primary co- operative society or not as held by the hon'ble apex court in the case of Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 431 ITR 1 (SC). Therefore, the reasoning of the AO cannot be upheld in the eye’s of law in view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court overriding the decision of the hon'ble jurisdictional high court in the case of Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT[2016] 384 ITR 490 (Ker). The ratio of the decision of the hon'ble jurisdictional high court in the case of Neleshwar Rangekallu Chethy Vyavasaya Thozhilai Sahakarana Sangham vs. CIT [2023] 459 ITR 730 or the provisions of section 80A(5) have no application to the facts of the present case, in as much as, in the present case the assessee made claim in the return of income filed in response to the notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Therefore, the reasoning of the CIT(A) cannot be upheld in the eyes of law. Therefore, the orders of the lower authorities are hereby reversed and the AO is directed to allow the deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed.
More judgments on Section 80P
- Shree Bandharda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd… vs Income Tax Officer Ward -4, JunagadhITA 881/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Duddukuru Primary Agricultural Cooperative… vs ITO, Ward - 1, TadepalligudemITA 258/VIZ/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Jijamata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari… vs ITO Ward -1, BhandraITA 102/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Shri Na vs Ari Khedut Sahkari Society Ltd…ITA 362/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026
- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026