Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.149

Section 80P(2)(d) falls under section 80P of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 149 (Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 149 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 80P(2)(d) is CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd. (88 ITR 192), cited in 2,664 of the 2,440 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80P(2)(d)

CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd.
88 ITR 192 · 1973 · Supreme Court
2,664
citing judgments

When two equally plausible interpretations of a taxing provision are possible, or when conflicting views exist from non-jurisdictional High Courts, the interpretation that favors the assessee must be adopted.

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.

State Bank Of India v. CIT
389 ITR 578 · 2016 · High Court
817
citing judgments

Income arising from a cooperative society's surplus funds invested in short-term deposits and securities is not attributable to the society's core activities and, therefore, is not eligible for exemption under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. v. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society
392 ITR 74 · 2017 · High Court
762
citing judgments

Interest income earned by a cooperative society from its investments or surplus deposits with a cooperative bank is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

CIT v. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.
306 ITR 392 · 2008 · Supreme Court
577
citing judgments

The "Purpose Test" determines whether an incentive or subsidy is a capital or revenue receipt for income tax purposes. If the incentive's purpose is to enable an assessee to set up a new industry or make investments in capital assets, it is a capital receipt and not taxable.

Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr.
156 ITR 11 · 1985 · High Court
541
citing judgments

When there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Courts, the view that favors the assessee should be preferred.

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).

Judgments on Section 80P(2)(d)

Rena Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Latur vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax -2, Aurangabad

ITA 1249/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Assessment Year :2013-14 Rena Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., A/P Niwada, Tq. Renapur, Dist. Latur. ……….Appellant Pan No. Aaaar1864N V/S. Pr. Commissioner Of Income-Tax 2, Aurangabad ……… Respondent Assessee By : Shri Girish Ladda, A.R Department By : Shri Kalika Singh, D.R Date Of Hearing : 06-01-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07-01-2022 Order Per Ravish Sood, Jm The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Aurangabad, Dated 27.03.2018 Under Sec.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short „Act‟), Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The A.O U/S 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 07/03/2016. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us: “1. The Notice Issued U/S 263 By The Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax-2, Aurangabad & The Order Passed U/S 263 Are Illegal, Bad In Law & Without Jurisdiction. 2. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Pr. Cit Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Assuming Jurisdiction In Passing The Order U/S 263, More So When The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Is Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. 3. The Pr. Cit-2 Erred In Holding That Assessee Not Eligible For Deduction Of Rs. 75,38,534 U/S 80P(2)(D) Of The Income-Tax Act & Further Erred In Setting Aside The Issue To The A.O.

For Appellant: Shri Girish Ladda, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kalika Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P(2)(d)

ITO - 17(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Annasaheb Patil Mathadi Kamgar Shakari Patpedhi Maryadit, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 460/MUM/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 460 To 463/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09, 2012-13 & 2009-10) बिधम/ Ito-17(1)(1) M/S. Annasaheb Patil Mathadi Room No.106, 1St Floor, G- Kamgar Shakari Patpedhi Vs. Block, Kautilya Bhavan, Maryadit Jivraj Bhanji Shah Market, 3Rd Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai- Floor, Yusuf Meherali Road, 400051. Masjid Bunder (W), Mumbai- 400009. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaab0167G (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri Mehul Jain Assessee By: Shri V. Kadrekar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/11/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -28, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2007-08, 2008-09, 2012-13 & 2009-10. Ita. No.460/Mum/2021 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 31.07.2020 Passed By The Cit(A)-28, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2007-08. Ita Nos. 460 To 463/Mum/2021 A.Ys.2007-08 To 2012-13 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri V. KadrekarFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)(i)Section 40A(7)Section 44ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(i)Section 80P(4)

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)

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)

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)