Section 57 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.93

Section 57 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 93 (Deductions) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 93 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 57 is CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State (200 Taxmann 220), cited in 348 of the 1,225 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 57

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.

Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. v. Assessing Officer
154 Taxmann.com 305 · 2023 · Supreme Court
136
citing judgments

Section 80P(4) is not applicable to a cooperative bank unless it is classified as a 'bank' under the provisions of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. For cooperative banks not meeting this definition, the deduction for interest earned from investments in cooperative societies is available under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd.
226 ITR 97 · 1997 · Supreme Court
125
citing judgments

The doctrine of mutuality applies only when there is complete identity between the contributors to a common fund and the participants in its surplus. Income received from non-members or distinct classes of members who do not share this identity is not covered by mutuality and is taxable.

Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO
58 Taxmann.com 35 · 2015 · High Court
114
citing judgments

When a co-operative society earns interest on deposits with scheduled banks, this income is assessable under "Income from other sources" (Section 56), and the society is entitled to deduct related administrative and proportionate expenses under Section 57 to tax only the net interest income.

CIT v. Karnataka State Co-operative Apex Bank
251 ITR 194 · 2001 · Supreme Court
106
citing judgments

Interest income earned by a co-operative bank from statutory investments or mandatory deposits, which are essential for conducting its banking business, qualifies as business income and is exempt under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. V.P. Gopinathan
248 ITR 449 · 2001 · Supreme Court
66
citing judgments

Interest paid on a loan taken against the security of a fixed deposit cannot be set off against or reduced from the interest income earned on that fixed deposit. The Income-tax Act does not permit such netting.

79 Taxman 378/216 ITR 548 (Bom.) 4. CIT v. Macbrout Engineering (P.) Ltd.
52 Taxmann.com 219 · 2014 · High Court
43
citing judgments

If the Revenue accepts the Tribunal's decision for earlier years without challenge, it cannot assail the same decision in subsequent years, provided the facts are similar.

Seth R. Dalmia v. CIT
110 ITR 644 · 1977 · Supreme Court
40
citing judgments

An indirect connection between expenditure and income can be sufficient to establish the required nexus for deductibility under Section 57(iii). The connection need not be direct.

254(2) of the Act. In Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT
295 ITR 466 · 2007 · Supreme Court
35
citing judgments

A mistake apparent from the record that prejudices a party is rectifiable under section 254(2) of the Act.

Cartini India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT & Anr.
314 ITR 275 · 2009 · High Court
34
citing judgments

Reopening an assessment based on a mere change of opinion, without any tangible material, is invalid. The Assessing Officer cannot withdraw an issue after considering the assessee's reply and then re-open the case on the same grounds.

Judgments on Section 57

Prem Devi Baid, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 6(5), Jaipur, Ncrb, Statue Circle, C-Scheme

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 50/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Mr. Dheeraj Borad, CA. Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 14ASection 250Section 57Section 68

Mukesh Chhotelal Gupta, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 797/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19 Shri Mukesh Chhotelal Gupta The Dcit, Cir.(1)(1) Gupta Nivas Vs. Ahmedabad. Chandkheda Sabarmati Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Ablpg 9729 N (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora, Ar : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/08/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(1)Section 194ASection 57

Nilesh Porwal, Indore vs. DCIT/ACIT, Indore

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 894/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 144Section 253(5)Section 57

Gujarat Industrial Investment Corporation Limited Employees Provident Fund, Gandhinagar vs. The ITO, Ward-1(Exemptions), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 584/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Maulik Kansara, ARFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(25)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(38)Section 57

Indur Thanwerdas Dadlani, Mumbai vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax PCIT, Mumbai-42, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed without any order as to cost

ITA 2476/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarindur Thanwerdas Dadlani Vs. Pr. Cit Flat No. 4604, The Imperial Mumbai – 42 Towers, Mp Mill Compound, Room No. 741, Aayakar Bb Nakashe Marg, Mardeo, Bhavan, Mk Road, Mumbai – 400034. Mumbai Pan/Gir No. Aacpd5262D (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 263Section 57Section 74

Pathanamthitta Sndp Union Development and Welfare Society, Konni vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Alappuzha

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 168/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2018-19
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 57

Shivaji Vithalrao Narhare, Latur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Latur

ITA 1107/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1107/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shivaji Vithalrao Narhare, V The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.236, Suraya Bungal, S Ward-1, Latur. Avishkar Housing Society, Rto Office, Babalgaon Roads, Sarola, Latur – 413512. Maharashtra. Pan: Aahpn3610J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Mr.Govind D. Chevale - Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Renge – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 29/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16 Dated 08.04.2024, Emanating From Order U/S.144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 27.12.2017. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 18Section 250Section 57

Ningaiah Siddu, Mysore vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1)& Tps, Mysore

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

ITA 921/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian, Jt.CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 144Section 57Section 69C

Waseem Alam, West Champaran vs. ITO, National E Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 17/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.17/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Waseem Alam…...………………….....…..…………………....Appellant Bhawanipur Kursi Barawa, Sikta, West Champaran, Bihar-845307. [Pan: Alopa0369B] Vs. Ito, Nfac, Delhi…………..……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 22, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.11.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.9,68,550. The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny Under The E- Assessment Scheme, With The Specific Issue Of Verification Of Large Deduction Claimed Under Section 57 Of The Act. Notice Under Section 143(2) & Subsequently Under Section 142(1) Was Issued To The Assessee. Although The Assessee Uploaded Certain Documents Electronically In Response, The Details Were Found To Be Incomplete. The

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 57

ITO, Ward - 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shree Gayatri Cottex Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 688/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri T R Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Bavishi, CA
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 37Section 57

Gopalakrishnan Pukalakkat Balakrishnan, Ernakulam vs. Assistant Commissioner, Non Corp Circle 2(1), Kochi

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

ITA 295/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Respondent: Shri Sherry S Oommen
Section 143(3)Section 57

Shri Hasmukhbhai Bachubhai Baraiya, Surendranagar vs. The DCIT, Circle- 4 (1) (1), Ahmedabad

ITA 685/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.685/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Hasmukhbhai Bachubhai Bariya, Vs. Dcit Circle -4(1) (1), B M & Co, Old Vegetable Market, Aaykar Bhavan, Vejalpur, Surendranagar - 363001 Ahmedabad - 380015 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Anspb1144R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Rachna Khandhar, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05 / 05 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 14 / 07 /2025

For Appellant: Rachna Khandhar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. SR. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 57

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Santosh Shivaji Lad, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1522/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Murali Mohan M, CIT (DR)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 57

The Garoh Co-Operative Agricultural Service Society Limited, Dharamshala, Kangra vs. Income Tax Officer, Dharamshala

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

ITA 67/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

The Garoh Co-Operative Agricultural Service Society Limited, Dharamshala, Kangra vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Dharamshala, Dharamshala

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

ITA 66/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

Sri Gurudeva Vividhodesha Co-Operative Society Limited, Belthangady vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Puttur

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

ITA 361/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Ashutosh Kumar HUF, Mumbai vs. ACIT-24(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 892/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal & Shri Fenil Bhatt, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Aditya M. Rai, Sr. D/R
Section 271(1)(c)Section 57

Ashutosh Kumar HUF, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 24(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3275/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal & Shri Fenil Bhatt, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Aditya M. Rai, Sr. D/R
Section 271(1)(c)Section 57

Pokharna Educational Trust, Pune vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1244/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 10Section 10(23)Section 10(230)(iad)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 57

Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(1), Bengaluru, Bangalore vs. M/S. Bangalore Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Bangalore

ITA 2348/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 250