KEEZHALLUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KANNUR vs. THE ITO WARD 2, KANNUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the disallowance should be on the interest earned, not the investment itself. It set aside the matter to the Assessing Officer to re-quantify the disallowance based on the audited accounts.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a cooperative bank, claimed deduction for its entire income under Section 80P. The Assessing Officer disallowed interest on investments in treasury savings and other institutions. The CIT(A) partly allowed the deduction but sustained the disallowance on interest from treasury savings and other institutions.
What were the issues?
Whether interest earned on investments in treasury savings and other institutions is eligible for deduction under Section 80P. The correct quantification of disallowance on such interest income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)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.
- Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. v. ACIT499 citing397 ITR 1 · 2017 · SC
- PCIT v. Peroorkada Service Co-op. Bank Ltd.208 citing442 ITR 141 · 2022 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Sanjay Arora, AM & Shri Manomohan Das, JM
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
O R D E R Per Bench: This is a set of two Appeals by the Assessee, agitating part-confirmation of it’s assessments under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) for assessment years (AYs.) 2015-16 and 2016-17 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), vide its separate Orders of even date (02.01.2023). The appeals raising identical issues, were heard together, and are being disposed of per a common, consolidated order.
The only effective Ground, identically worded, raised per the instant appeals is Ground 2, as under; Gd. 1 being general in nature, warranting no adjudication: “The learned CIT(A) has erred in treating Rs.10,00,000 (Rs.15,00,000) as the interest received on investments in Treasury Small Savings and Rs.17,217 (Rs.17,217) as interest received on investments with other institutions as these figures are that of the investments itself and not interest. The interest earned on Treasury savings deposit was Rs.36,045(Rs.1,49,949) only.” [(*) figures in bracket are for the second year, i.e., AY 2016-2017] & 164/Coch/2023 (AYs. 2015-2016 & 2016-2017) Keezhallur SCB Ltd. v. ITO 3. The assessee, a society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 as a primary agricultural credit society (PACS), claimed deduction for the entirety of it’s income for the relevant years u/s. 80P(1) r.w.s.80P(2). The same was disallowed in assessment following the decision in the case of The Citizen Co- operative Society Ltd. v. Asst. CIT 397 ITR 1 (SC), so that the assessee, extending the bulk of it’s loans to nominal members, was, as per the Assessing Officer (AO), hit by sec.80P(4), precluding deduction u/s. 80P. The same was though allowed in appeal, save to the extent of interest on investment in treasury savings and with other institutions, being covered neither u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) nor u/s. 80P(2)(d), relying on CIT v. Peroorkada SCB Ltd. [2022] 442 ITR 141 (Ker), by the first appellate authority, holding as under:- “8.10 In view of the above, respectfully following the latest decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Kerala in the cases of (1) CIT vs. Peroorkada Service Co-operative Bank; and (2) PCIT vs. Vilappil Service Co- op. Bank Ltd. (2022) 442 ITR 141, order dated 01.11.2021 (supra), I am of the considered opinion that, in the instant case, the assessee society, being a Co- operative Society / PACS, is entitled to claim interest received on fixed deposits made with the District Co-operative Banks and dividend on share capital as deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act. Accordingly, the AO is directed to allow deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest and dividend received from the Kannur District Co-operative Bank and other District/ State Co-operative Banks, if any. 8.11 However, it may be noted that the assessee is not entitled to claim deduction in respect of interest and dividend received from any other institutions, other than those registered as Co-operative Society / PACS under the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. Accordingly, I am of the considered opinion that interest received from investments made in Treasury Small Savings of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rs.15,00,000)and interest from investments in other institutions of Rs.17,217/- (Rs.17,217), aggregating to Rs.10,17,217/- (Rs.15,17,217), is not eligible for deduction either u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) or u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act. As such, addition made by the AO to the extent of Rs.10,17,217/- (Rs.15,17,217) is sustained. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee on the issue are treated as partly allowed.” [(*) figures in bracket are for the second year, i.e., AY 2016-2017]
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 →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026