Pr. CIT v. Totagars

395 ITR 611High Court2017#39 most cited

What is Pr. CIT v. Totagars authority for?

Interest income earned by a cooperative society from surplus deposits or investments held with a cooperative bank is not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act.

1,074

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,164 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Pr. CIT v. Totagars · 395 ITR 611 · Section 80P(2)(d) · cooperative society · interest income · cooperative bank · deduction · deposits · investments · eligibility 80P

Also reported as

297 CTR 158

Sections most often in play

Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(a)(i)Section 80P(4)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 250Section 2(19)Section 56

Issues it is cited on

section 80(2)(d)section 2(19)section 80p(4)section 80p(1)section 80p(2)(a)(iii)section 80p(2)(c)section 80(p)(2)(d)section 80p(2)(d)section 194a(3)(v)section 80p(2)section 80p(2)(a)section 80p(2)(a)(i)

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. Totagars

The Bagalkot Co-Operative Housing Society Limited, Bagalkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1, Bagalkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1861/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.G.S.Prashanth, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57Section 58Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…anking or credit facilities to its members and thus it entitled to claim deduction u/s 80P(2)(d). 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) has erroneously applied the judgment of Totagar Co-operative Sale Society Limited (2017) 395 ITR 611 (Kar.) in respect of interest from Banks. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(Appeals) has failed in allowing deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) on account of interest earned on deposits from Co-operative Banks whereas various judgments are in the favour of appeal’s claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 2 M/s.The Bagalkot…

M/S. Prathamika Krushi Pattina Sahakara Niyamita, Hagaribommanahalli vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kalaburgi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1725/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Siva Prasad Reddy, ITPFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 3Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ities as "investment" are ineligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. (Paragraph-13 of the Judgment) 13. It can thus be seen that the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Totalgars Cooperative Sales Society in 395 ITR 611 (Karn) is that in the light of the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in Totgars Co-operative Sale Society (supra), in case of a society engaged in providing credit facilities to its members, income from investments made in banks does not fall within any of the categories mentioned in section 80P(2)(a) of the Act. However, section 80P(2)(…

M/S. Prathamika Krushi Pattina Sahakara Niyamita, Hosapete vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kalaburgi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1724/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Siva Prasad Reddy, ITPFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…ities as "investment" are ineligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. (Paragraph-13 of the Judgment) 13. It can thus be seen that the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Totalgars Cooperative Sales Society in 395 ITR 611 (Karn) is that in the light of the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in Totgars Co-operative Sale Society (supra), in case of a society engaged in providing credit facilities to its members, income from investments made in banks does not fall within any of the categories mentioned in section 80P(2)(a) of the Act. However, section 80P(2)(…

Belgaum Coal & Coke Consumer Co-Op Association Ltd, Belgaum vs. ITO, Ward - 1(1), Belgavi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 103/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji17 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.103/Pan/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Belgaum Coal & Coke Consumer Cooperative Association Ltd., Khanapur Road, Udyambag, Belgaum-590008. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaaat4615M बनाम / V/S. Ito, Ward- 1(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Belagavi. Assessee By : Shri Shivanand Halbhari Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12.11.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 17.11.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Belagavi (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 23.01.2018 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Learned A.O. Has Erred In Not Allowing Deduction U/S 80P(2)(D) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Without Properly Verifying The Details Of Investee. 2. The Learned A.O. Has Wrongly Interpreted The Provisions Of Section 80P(2)(D) By Not Treating Investees I.E. Belgaum Industrial Cooperative Bank & Belgaum District Central Cooperative Bank As Cooperative Societies. 3. The Learned A.O. Has Wrongly Interpreted The Definition Of Cooperative Society Vide Section 2(19) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By Treating Those Entities Which Are Registered Under The Co-Operative Societies Act, 1912 (2 Of 1912), Or Under Any Other Law For The Time Being In Force In Any State For The Registration Of Co-Operative Societies, As Not Being Cooperative Societies.

For Appellant: Shri Shivanand HalbhariFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 143(3)Section 2(19)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…in favour of the assessee by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. (supra). 10. Insofar as the reliance of the ld. DR on the case of Pr. CIT and Another Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sales Society (2017) 395 ITR 611 (Kar.) is concerned, we find that the issue in that case was the eligibility of deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act on interest earned by the assessee co-operative society on investments made in co-operative banks. In that case, the assessee was engaged in the activity of marketing agricultural produce by its members; accepting deposits from its m…

The Hukkeri Taluka Agri Produce Co-Operative Marketing Society Limited, Sankeshwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Belgavi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 30/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji16 Nov 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 2Section 80(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…in favour of the assessee by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. (supra). 10. Insofar as the reliance of the ld. DR on the case of Pr. CIT and Another Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sales Society (2017) 395 ITR 611 (Kar.) is concerned, we find that the issue in that case was the eligibility of deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act on interest earned by the assessee co-operative society on investments made in co-operative banks. In that case, the assessee was engaged in the activity of marketing agricultural produce by its members; accepting deposits from its m…

Grama Seva Sahakari Sangh Ltd, Belgaum vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(4), Belagavi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji15 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.01/Pan/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Grama Seva Sahakari Sangh Ltd., Sankonhatti, Tq: Athani, Dist. Belgaum. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaaag0157B बनाम / V/S. Ito, Ward-1(4), ……""यथ" / Respondent Belagavi. Assessee By : Shri Shivanand Halbhavi Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 15.11.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Gulbarga (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 26.10.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Learned A.O. & Learned Cit (A) Have Erred In Disallowing Deduction Claimed Under Section 80P(2)(A) By Treating Is As Income From Other Sources. 2. The Learned A.O. Has Erred In Treating Income From Business & Profession As Income From Other Sources. 3. The Learned Ao & Learned Cit(A) Have Wrongly Interpreted The Provisions Of Sec 80P(2)(D) By Not Treating As Co-Op. Societies. 4. The Learned Ao Has Wrongly Interpreted The Definition Of Co-Op Society Vide Sec. 2(19) Of The It Act, 1961 By Treating Those Entities Which Are Registered Under The Co-Op Societies, 1912(2 Of 1912), Or Under Any Other Law For The Time Being In Force In Any State For The Registration Of Co-Op Societies, As Not Being Co-Op Societies.

For Appellant: Shri Shivanand HalbhaviFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 143(3)Section 2(19)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…in favour of the assessee by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. (supra). 10. Insofar as the reliance of the ld. DR on the case of Pr. CIT and Another Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sales Society (2017) 395 ITR 611 (Kar.) is concerned, we 5 find that the issue in that case was the eligibility of deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act on interest earned by the assessee co-operative society on investments made in co-operative banks. In that case, the assessee was engaged in the activity of marketing agricultural produce by its members; accepting deposits from it…

Mahishwadagi Grama Seva Sahakari Sangh Ltd, Mahishwadagi vs. ITO, Ward - 1(4), Belgaum

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 65/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.65/Pan/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Mahishwadagi Grama Seva Sahakari Sangh Ltd., Mahishwadagi, Tal. Athani, Dist. Belagavi- 591304. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaaam0355P बनाम / V/S. Ito, Ward-1(4), ……""यथ" / Respondent Belgaum. Assessee By : Shri Chetan Chougule Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08.11.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 12.11.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Gulbarga (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 30.11.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Because The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Overlooked The Facts Of The Case & Not Taken Into Account The Submissions Given By The Appellant With Respect To Interest Received From Mandatory Statutory Deposits Kept With District Central Bank & Also Dividend Received From Such Mandatory Investments & Considered Them As Income From Other Sources & Also Interest Received From Savings Bank A/C Is Also Considered As Income From Other Sources, Instead Of Considering The Same As Income Attributable To Providing Credit Facilities To Its Members & Denied The Deduction Claimed Under Section 80P(2)(A)(I) Of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Because, The Learned Assessing Officer Erred In Denying The Deduction Claimed Under Section 80P(2)(A)(I) Of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Because The Learned Assessing Officer Has Overlooked The Facts Of The Case With Respect To Interest Received From Mandatory Statutory Deposits Kept With District Central Bank & Also Dividend Received From Such Mandatory

For Appellant: Shri Chetan ChouguleFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…favour of the assessee by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. (supra). 5 10. Insofar as the reliance of the ld. DR on the case of Pr. CIT and Another Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sales Society (2017) 395 ITR 611 (Kar.) is concerned, we find that the issue in that case was the eligibility of deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act on interest earned by the assessee co-operative society on investments made in co-operative banks. In that case, the assessee was engaged in the activity of marketing agricultural produce by its members; accepting deposits from its m…

M/S Rajasthan Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd., Jaipur vs. PCIT, Jaipur-2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 23/JPR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (Pr.CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

…vour of assessee by Hon’ble ITAT Surat Bench in case of Bardoli Vibhag Gram Vikas Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. Vs. PCIT 189 ITD 601 dt. 12.05.2021 after considering the decision of Karnataka High Court in case of PCIT Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sales Society 395 ITR 611 where it is held that interest earned on deposits with cooperative bank is not eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d). Therefore, in view of this decision of coordinate bench, the order passed by PCIT u/s 263 be quashed. 10. It was further submitted that ld PCIT/DR has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of CIT Vs. Totag…

M/S. Kokkada Primary Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Belthangady vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Puttur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 371/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri. Srikrishna, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT-DR
Section 18Section 2Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…earned out of investments with co-operative banks. For denying the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the I.T.Act, the Assessing Officer relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Totagars Co-operative Sales Society reported in 395 ITR 611 (Kar.). 3. Aggrieved by the disallowance of deduction u/s 80P of the I.T.Act, the assessee preferred an appeal to the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) confirmed the view taken by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) held that the assessee was having substantial dealings with non-members (nominal members), therefore, in view of the judgment of…

M/S. Manjunatheshwara Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6(2)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2238/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Chaitanya V. Mudrabettu, CAFor Respondent: Sri.K.Sankar Ganesh, JCIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…tive banks, the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the I.T.Act also cannot be granted. In holding so, the learned CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Pr.CIT & Anr. v. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society reported in 395 ITR 611 (Kar.). 6. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before the Tribunal. The learned AR reiterated the submissions made before the Income Tax Authorities. It was submitted that if the 4 ITA No.2238/Bang/2019. M/s.Manjunatheshwara Credit Co-op.So.Ltd.. interest income is to be assessed as income from other sources, necessarily, the cost incu…

M/S. Panaje Cabank Limited, Puttur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Puttur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 207/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 234BSection 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 8O

…earned out of investments with co-operative banks. For denying the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the I.T.Act, the Assessing Officer relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Totagars Co-operative Sales Society reported in 395 ITR 611 (Kar.). 4. Aggrieved by the disallowance of deduction u/s 80P of the I.T.Act, the assessee preferred an appeal to the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) confirmed the view taken by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) held that the assessee was having more than 15% members as associate / nominal members, which violates the provisions of Karnatak…

M/S. Primary Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Service Society Limited, Belthangady vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1, Puttur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1306/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Smt Beena Pillaiita. No. 1306/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Primary Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Service The Income Tax Officer, Society Ltd., Ward – 1, Puttur – Ujire, 574 201. Belthangady – 574 240. Vs. Pan: Aaaju0058J (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee: Shri Mahesh R. Uppin, Advocate For Revenue : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.Cit.(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 30.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.10.2021 Order Per Beena Pillai, Jm. Present Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Dated 14/03/2019 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A) Mangaluru For Assessment Year 2016-17 On The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh R. Uppin, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT.(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…upra), was not on the deduction claimed u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act, but was rendered in respect of deduction claimed under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Anr. vs. Totgars Co-Operative Sale Society reported in 395 ITR 611 took a different view and held that interest income earned on deposits whether with any other bank will be in the nature of income from other sources and not income from business and therefore the deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act cannot be allowed to the Assessee. The Hon’ble Court followed decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of…

M/S. Odiyoor Sri Vividoddesha Souhardha Sahakari Niyamitha, Bantwal vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(4), Mangaluru

In the result, appeal by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 880/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Odiyoor Sri Vividoddesha Souharda Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Niyamitha, Ward – 2(4), Sri Gurudevadatta Samstanam, Mangaluru. Odiyoor, Bantwal – 574 243. Pan : Aaaao 2537 M Assessee By : Shri. Srinivasa Kamath, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore Date Of Hearing : 30.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2021 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Srinivasa Kamath, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 2(19)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…eduction was also denied by the AO on the ground that interest from co-operative banks are not eligible for the said deduction and in any event, as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Totgars Co-operative Society, 395 ITR 611 (Karnataka), interest earned on investments have to be treated as income from other sources and not income from business and therefore not eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The assessee claimed expenses on earning interest income and in this regard filed a calculation of cost of funds and interest received by the assessee…

Nikhara Souharda Credit Co-Operative Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 5(2)(5), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 630/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Nitish Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(2)Section 2(19)Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ved from co- operative societies, the assessee-society is not entitled to the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the I.T.Act. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Totagars Co-operative Sales Society reported in 395 ITR 611 (Kar.). (iii) The claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T.Act was also denied by placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Totagars Co-operative Sale Society reported (supra). 5. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed an appeal to the Tribunal. The learned AR has filed a paper book comprising of 98 pa…

Nikhara Souharda Credit Co-Operative Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 5(2)(5), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 629/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Nitish Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(2)Section 2(19)Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ved from co- operative societies, the assessee-society is not entitled to the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the I.T.Act. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Totagars Co-operative Sales Society reported in 395 ITR 611 (Kar.). (iii) The claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T.Act was also denied by placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Totagars Co-operative Sale Society reported (supra). 5. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed an appeal to the Tribunal. The learned AR has filed a paper book comprising of 98 pa…

The Primary Co-Operative Agricultural & Rural Development Bank Limited, Sullia vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Puttur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 468/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year:2016-17

For Appellant: Shri A. Ravish Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R
Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(i)

…e Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumukur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-operative Ltd., 230 taxman 309 (Karn), the DR relied on a subsequent decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Totgars Cooperative Sale Society Ltd., 395 ITR 611 (Karn.). We have carefully gone through the said judgment. The facts of the case before the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court was that the Hon’ble Court was considering a case relating to Assessment Years 2007-08 to 2011-12. In case decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of the very same assessee, the Assessment Years involved was Assessment…

Petit Towers Co-Op Housing Soc. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO - 19(2)(5), Mumbai

ITA 549/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () M/S Petit Towers Co-Op. Income Tax Officer, 19(2)(5) Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Matru Mandir, Cs 597 & 598, Petit Towers, Mumbai - 400 007 August Kranti Marg, Bomani Petit Road, Cumballa Hill, Kemps Corner, Mumbai – 400 036 Pan No. Aaaap5446J (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R Revenue By : Shri R. K. Sahu, D.R Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/09/2021 Order Per Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mumbai-19 (For Short “Pr. Cit”), U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short „Act‟), Dated 17.02.2021, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The A.O U/S 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 31.08.2017. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Sahu, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…ITA No. 549/Mum/2021 A.Y. 2015-16 1 M/s Petit Towers Co-op Housing Society Ltd. Vs. ITO, 19(2)(5) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) M/s Petit Towers Co-op. Income Tax Officer, 19(2)(5) Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Matru Mandir, CS 597 and 598, Petit Towers, Mumbai - 400 007 August Kranti Marg, Bomani Petit Road, Cumballa Hill, Kemps Corner, Mumbai – 400 036 PAN No. AAAAP5446J (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R Revenue by : Shri R. K. Sahu, D.R Date of Hearing : 26/08/2021 Date…

Sri Ananthapadmanabha Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Karkala vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3, Udupi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1256/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R
Section 234BSection 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…e Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumukur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-operative Ltd., 230 taxman 309 (Karn), the DR relied on a subsequent decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Totgars Cooperative Sale Society Ltd., 395 ITR 611 (Karn.). We have carefully gone through the said judgment. The facts of the case before the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court was that the Hon’ble Court was considering a case relating to Assessment Years 2007-08 to 2011-12. In case decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of the very same assessee, the Assessment Years involved was Assessment…

M/S. Aletty Co-Operative Agricultural Bank Limited, Sullia vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 469/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Aletty Co-Operative Agricultural Bank Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Aletty Post & Village, Ward -1, Sullia – 574 247. Puttur. Pan : Aaaaa 4243 J Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Ravish Rao, Ca Respondent By : Shri. Elamurugu G, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 30.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.08.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mangaluru, Dated 06.01.2020, In Relation To Ay 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Is A Primary Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Society Registered Under The Karnataka State Co-Operative Societies Act, 1959. It Accepts Deposits From Its Members & Provides Credit Facilities To Its Members. In The Return Of Income Filed For Assessment Year 2015-16, The Assessee Claimed Deduction Under Section 80P Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Act) Of A Sum Of Rs.68,85,589/-. Out Of The Aforesaid Sum That Was Claimed As Deduction U/S.80P Of The Act, A Sum Of Rs.43,49,141 Was Interest On Deposits Made With South Canara District Co-Operative Bank(Scdcc Bank) & A Sum Of Rs.5,72,959 Was Dividend On Investments Made In Scdcc Bank. The Deduction On The Aforesaid Two Page 2 Of 14 Sums Were Claimed By The Assessee U/S.80P(2)(A)(D) Of The Act. The Remaining Sum Was Claimed As Deduction U/S.80P(2)(A) (I) Of The Act, Being Income Earned From Providing Credit Facility To Its Members.

For Appellant: Shri. Ravish Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Elamurugu G, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…re deduction on the aforesaid sum cannot be allowed to the assessee either under section 80P(2)(a)(i) or 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The AO held that as per the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Totagars Co- operative Sale Society 395 ITR 611(Karn)(supra), following the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Totagars Co- operative Sale Society 322 ITR 283 (SC) held that interest income is taxable under the head income from other sources and will not be entitled to deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Karnataka High…

M/S. Ravindra Multipurpose Co-Operative Society Limited, Udupi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3, Udupi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1262/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Ramasubramaniyan, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. H Kabila, Addl.CIT
Section 143(2)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…pra), was not on the deduction claimed u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act, but was rendered in respect of deduction claimed under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Anr. vs. Totgars Co- Operative Sale Society reported in 395 ITR 611 took a different view and held that interest income earned on deposits whether with any other bank will be in the nature of income from other sources and not income from business and therefore the deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act cannot be allowed to the Assessee. The Hon’ble Court followed decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of…