Section 56 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.92

Section 56 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 92 (Income from other sources) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 92 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 56 is Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO (322 ITR 283), cited in 1,283 of the 1,790 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 56

Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO
322 ITR 283 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,283
citing judgments

The interest income earned by a cooperative society from investing its surplus funds in fixed deposits with banks is not "derived from" its eligible business activities and is taxable as "income from other sources" under Section 56, thus not qualifying for deduction under Section 80P.

Pr. CIT v. Totagars
395 ITR 611 · 2017 · High Court
1,074
citing judgments

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.

Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT
431 ITR 1 · 2021 · Supreme Court
999
citing judgments

Section 80P(4) serves as a proviso to Section 80P(1) and (2), excluding only cooperative banks that are cooperative societies and possess an RBI license for banking business. Its purpose is to exclude cooperative banks operating like commercial banks that lend money to the public.

Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. v. ITO
230 Taxmann 309 · 2015 · High Court
527
citing judgments

A cooperative society is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) if it is engaged in cooperative activities. It also clarifies the allowability of deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) for interest income received from investments made in cooperative banks, after duly considering the Supreme Court's decision in Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd.

Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. v. ACIT
397 ITR 1 · 2017 · Supreme Court
499
citing judgments

A co-operative credit society engaged in banking business with the general public, accepting deposits from non-members and advancing loans to non-members, is treated as a co-operative bank. Such a society falls under the exclusionary clause of Section 80P(4) and is not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i).

Totgar's Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO
188 Taxmann 282 · 2010 · Supreme Court
486
citing judgments

Interest income earned by a co-operative society from investments, particularly with co-operative banks, is not eligible for deduction under Section 80P as it is not attributable to the core business activities of the society and constitutes "other income", not "profits and gains of business".

CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State
200 Taxmann 220 · 2011 · High Court
348
citing judgments

Interest earned by a Co-operative Society from investing fixed deposits in banks is entitled to a deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

Pr. CIT v. Totagars Co-operative Sales Society
83 Taxmann.com 140 · 2017 · High Court
306
citing judgments

Interest income earned by a co-operative society from deposits or investments made in a co-operative bank is not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in view of Section 80P(4).

Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-op. Ltd. v. ITO
55 Taxmann.com 447 · 2015 · High Court
267
citing judgments

Interest income earned by a co-operative society from temporary deposits with other banks, when such deposits are made from its business funds, qualifies as business income eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) and not as income from other sources.

Bangalore Club v. CIT
350 ITR 509 · 2013 · Supreme Court
247
citing judgments

The Supreme Court affirmed the doctrine of mutuality, holding that contributions received from and returned to members for a common purpose do not constitute taxable profits. However, income from transactions with non-members or interest earned from investments in external entities (like cooperative banks) may break the mutuality chain and be taxable under Section 56, falling outside the scope of Section 80P deductions.

Judgments on Section 56

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central)-1, Delhi vs. Moin Akhtar Qureshi

ITA - 199 / 2026HC Delhi17 Mar 2026

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central)-1, Delhi vs. Moin Akhtar Qureshi

ITA - 196 / 2026HC Delhi17 Mar 2026

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central)-1, Delhi vs. Moin Akhtar Qureshi

ITA - 194 / 2026HC Delhi17 Mar 2026

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central)-1, Delhi vs. Mohd. Shahnawaz

ITA - 188 / 2026HC Delhi17 Mar 2026

Kanaka Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., Hosadurga vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-2, Chitradurga

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

ITA 2915/BANG/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Girish T.L, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate – Standing
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Perurchettipalayam Paccs, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ncw-4(2), Coimbatore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3223/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Mr.S. Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.N. Madan Kumar, JCIT
Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Perurchettipalayam Paccs, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ncw-4(2), Coimbatore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3222/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Mr.S. Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.N. Madan Kumar, JCIT
Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Perurchettipalayam Paccs, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ncw-4(2), Coimbatore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3221/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Mr.S. Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.N. Madan Kumar, JCIT
Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Perurchettipalayam Paccs, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ncw-4(2), Coimbatore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3220/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Mr.S. Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.N. Madan Kumar, JCIT
Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Sree Cauvery Souharda Credit Sahakari Sangha Niyamitha, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1)(1), Bengaluru

ITA 1854/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt. Sumana, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian, JCIT (DR
Section 10Section 250Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Sri Guru Ramalingeshwara Souharda Pattina Sahakari Niyamitha, Maski vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 1174/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, JCIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

ACIT, Circle- 19(1), Delhi vs. Pnc Rajasthan Highways Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, relevant grounds of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3248/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deependra Mohan,CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amish S. Gupt, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 46ASection 56

M/S Sova, Panaji vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panaji

The appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 24/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji10 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2018-19 M/S Sova Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Panaji, Goa-403001. Pan: Aacfs8862Q . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent

For Appellant: Mr Sukhsagar Syal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253(1)Section 263Section 56

Rajendrakumar Ichubhai Kothari, Bharuch vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Bharuch

In the result, quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 836/SRT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.835/Srt/2025 आयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.836/Srt/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Rajendrakumar Ichubhai The Ito बनाम/ Kothari Ward-1(4) V/S. 2 119 Parkhetiafaliyu Kervada Bharuch – 356 069 Amod Bharuch Bharuch – 392 025 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Cfupk 6177 B (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) (!) यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Surendra Modiani, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ajay Uke, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/03/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Two Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 11/06/2025 (Quantum Appeal) & 12/06/2025 (Penalty Appeal) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2013-14. Ita Nos.835 & 836/Srt/2025 Rajendrakumar Ichubhai Kothari Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Modiani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 56

Rajendrakumar Ichubhai Kothari, Bharuch vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Bharuch

In the result, quantum appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 835/SRT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.835/Srt/2025 आयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.836/Srt/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Rajendrakumar Ichubhai The Ito बनाम/ Kothari Ward-1(4) V/S. 2 119 Parkhetiafaliyu Kervada Bharuch – 356 069 Amod Bharuch Bharuch – 392 025 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Cfupk 6177 B (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) (!) यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Surendra Modiani, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ajay Uke, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/03/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Two Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 11/06/2025 (Quantum Appeal) & 12/06/2025 (Penalty Appeal) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2013-14. Ita Nos.835 & 836/Srt/2025 Rajendrakumar Ichubhai Kothari Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Modiani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 56

Esi Hospital Employees Coop Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-10(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3031/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3031/Chny/2025 िनधा&रण वष& /Assessment Year: 2022-23

For Appellant: Mr. G. Reddi Prakash, C.A +For Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

Shri K.P. Magennavar Laxmi Credit Souharda Sahakari Sangh Ltd.Manjari., Chikodi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nippani

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

ITA 33/PAN/2026[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji27 Feb 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. No.33/Pan/2026 (A.Y. 2015-16 ) Shri K.P.Magennavar Laxmi Vs I.T.O-Ward-1, Credit Souharda Sahakari Nemchand Building, . Sangh Limited, 747,Ashoknagar, 521,Laxmibuilding,Mainroad, Nipani-591237, Manjari, Chikodi, Karnataka. Belagavi-591213, Karnataka. Pan .No. Aabas3175N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Jaykumar Patil.Ar Revenue By Smt.Thamba Mahendra.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 25.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 27.02.2026 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of Addl/Jcit(A)-7 Mumbai Passed U/Se 143(3) & U/Sec250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A) Sustaining The Denial Of Claim Of Deduction U/Sec80P(2)(A)(I) Of The Ac & Without Prejudice Alternate Relief U/Sec80P(2)(D) Of The Act On Interest Income From Cooperative Banks & Scheduled Banks. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assessee Souhard Credit Cooperative Society Is Engaged In Providing

Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Mummalaneni Raghavan, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Guntur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 628/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Itat, Stating That The Reopening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act Was Based Merely On System Generated Information, Which Is Invalid & Without Any Tangible Material. In The Grounds Of Appeal, It Was Mentioned That The Assessment U/S 147 Is Beyond Time Limit Prescribed & Hence, The

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 194ASection 56

Mummalaneni Raghavan, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Guntur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 627/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Itat, Stating That The Reopening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act Was Based Merely On System Generated Information, Which Is Invalid & Without Any Tangible Material. In The Grounds Of Appeal, It Was Mentioned That The Assessment U/S 147 Is Beyond Time Limit Prescribed & Hence, The Proceedings Are Void-Ab-Initio.

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 194ASection 56

Sitaram Muchhala, Mardana vs. ITO Khargone, Khargone

ITA 661/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 45Section 56Section 57