Section 80P(4) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.149

Section 80P(4) 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(4) is Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO (322 ITR 283), cited in 1,283 of the 1,638 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80P(4)

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).

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".

Judgments on Section 80P(4)

Shri Doodhganga Credit Souhard Sahakari Limited, Borgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Nipani

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 110/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. /Ita No.110/Pan/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Doodhganga Credit Souharda Sahakari Ltd.; Borgaon, Tal. Chikodi, Dist. Belgaum Pan : Aaaad2210L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nipani, Karnataka. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod Vaidhya, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Vaidhya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 5Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

The Markandey Mahila Multipurpose Co-Op. Society Ltd, Belgaum vs. ITO, Ward - 1(2), Belgaum

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 372/PAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 372/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Markendey Mahila Multipurpose Co-Op Society Ltd.,12, At Post-Kangrail-Khurd, Taluka & Dist. Belgaum. Pan : Aabam5563C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(2), Belgaum ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod Vaidhya, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Vaidhya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

Mystique Rose Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO -22(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1290/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Chaugule (AR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

ITO 20 (3)(5), Mumbai vs. Vishal Junnar Sahakari Patpedhi Maryadit, Mumbai

ITA 7752/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Amarjit Singh () Assessment Year: 2013-14 Income Tax Officer-20(3)(5), Vishal Junnar Sahakari Patpedhi Room No. 205, 2Nd Floor, Maryadit, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Vs. 5-6, Marwadichawl, K.L. Borkar Parel, Marg, Ghaudapdev D.P. Wadi, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400033 Pan No. Aaaav 0104 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2013-14 Vishal Junnar Sahakari Income Tax Officer-20(3)(5), Room No. 205, 2Nd Floor, Piramal Patpedhi Maryadit, B/3, Sussex Industrial Estate, Vs. Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Dadojikonddeo Cross Road, Mumbai-400012. Byculla (E), Mumbai-400027. Pan No. Aaaav 0104 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer-20(3)(5), Vishal Junnar Sahakari Patpedhi Room No. 205, 2Nd Floor, Maryadit, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Vs. 5-6, Marwadichawl, K.L. Borkar Parel, Marg, Ghaudapdev D.P. Wadi, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400033 Pan No. Aaaav 0104 H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Rajendra Kadrekar&For Respondent: Mr. S.N. Kabra, DR
Section 80PSection 80P(4)

Krishnarajapet Taluk Agri Pro Co Op Marketing Society, Mandya vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mysore

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

ITA 514/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Krishnarajapet Taluk Agri Pro Co-Op Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Marketing Society Ltd., Mysore. K. R. Pet, K. R. Pet Taluk, Mandya 571 426. Pan : Aaaak 4566 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Shankar Gowda H, Fca Revenue By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.02.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. Shankar Gowda H, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(i)Section 80P(4)

V K Natha Co-Operative Housing Society, Mumbai vs. Asstt. CIT, Circle-19(3), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 1384/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 0P(4)Section 80(2)(d)Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

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)

New Vijay Co - Operative Housing Society Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT - 17, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 358/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 358/मुं/2021("न. व .2015-16) New Vijay Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd., 59, Vishnu Mahal, ‘D ‘Road, Opp. Wankhede Stadium, Churchgate, Mumbai 400 020 Pan:Aaaan-4356-R ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Principal Cit -17, Room No. 120, 1St Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai 400 051 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. Advocate Shri Sukhsagar Syal, Advocate ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Mahesh Akhade, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 17/ 12/2021 आदेश/ Order Per Bench: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-17 Mumbai [In Short ‘The Pcit’] Dated

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade, CIT-DR
Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

Havyaka Credit Souharda Sahakari Niyamita, Kumta vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Karwar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 27/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji16 Nov 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Parameshwar BhatFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(i)Section 80P(4)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2 (1), Panaji. vs. Shree Kalika Urban Co-Op. Credit Society Limited, Mapusa

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 367/PAN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji15 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.367/Pan/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle-2(1), .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Panaji. बनाम / V/S. Shree Kalika Urban Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd., Block No.6, Om Chambers, Feira Baiya, Near Laxminarayan Temple, Mapusa Bardes, Goa. ……""यथ" / Respondent Pan : Aacas1697Q Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak Assessee By : Shri R. K. Pikale 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 Revenue Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Panaji (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 20.09.2017 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Revenue Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Order Of The Ld. Cit (A) Is Opposed To Law & Facts Of The Case. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting Addition On Account Of Disallowance Of Deduction In Respect Of Income Of Co-Operative Society U/S. 80P(2)(A)(I), 80P(2)(C)(Ii), 80P(2)(D) & 40(A)(Ia) On The Ground That The Assessee Is A Co- Operative Society, Accepts Deposits Only From Its Members & Can Lend Money Only To Its Members & It Cannot Issue Cheque Books, When The Assessee Accepts Deposits & Grants Loans To Its Members On Which It Makes Profit & Gain By Way Of Charging Interest, Thus Providing Credit Facility Is Akin To Banking Business As Per Section 2(24)(Viia) & Part-V Of The Banking Regulation Act, 1949, Hence The Assessee Is Not Eligible For Deduction U/S. 80P.

For Appellant: Shri R. K. PikaleFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 2(24)(viia)Section 40Section 5Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)

Kansara Chawl Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT - 19, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 515/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2021AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 2(19)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 56Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

Cuffe Parade Persepolis Premises Co-Op. Soc. Ltd., Mumbai vs. The PCIT, Ward-17, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 243/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2021AY 2015-16
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(4)

Shri Shankarling Co-Operative Credit Souharda Sahakari Niyamit, Belagavi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(3), Belagavi

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

ITA 410/BANG/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Miss.Preethi S.Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

Asstt. CIT-27(3), Navi Mumbai vs. M/S the Bharat Petroleum Corpn., Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1939/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Acit-27(3) M/S The Bharat Petroleum Room No. 423, 4Th Floor, Tower Vs. Corporation Limited, No. 6, Vashi Railway Station C/O Bpcl, Refining Division, Complex, Vashi, Mahul, Mumbai – 400 704 Navi Mumbai – 400 703 Pan No. Aaajt0226F (Revenue) (Assessee) Assessee By : Ms. Dinkle Haria, A.R Revenue By : Shri Tharian Oommen, D.R Date Of Hearing : 29/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/10/2021 Order Per Ravish Sood, J.M:

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Haria, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 5Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

Gulshan Mercantile Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd., Muzaffarnagar vs. DCIT, Circle- 1, Muzaffarnagar

ITA 3982/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri O.P.Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(5)Section 40iSection 43BSection 80

M/S. Gulshan Mercantile Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd., Muzaffarnagar vs. ACIT, Muzaffarnagar

ITA 2166/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri O.P.Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(5)Section 40iSection 43BSection 80

ITO 26(2)(5), Mumbai vs. M/S Ramaraju Kshatriya Co-Op Credit Soc. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 1224/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Income Tax Officer-26(2)(5), M/S Ramaraja Kshatriya Co- Room No. 319, 3Rd Floor, Op. Credit Soc. Ltd., Kautilya Bhawan, B.K.C., 04, Ground Floor, Kaveri Bandra (E), Vs. Complex, Kurla Pipeline Road, Mumbai - 400051 Prabhat Wadi, Sakinaka, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aaaar9632A (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Bharat Andhale (Dr) Assessee By : Shri Anil Topiwala (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 16/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/09/2021

For Appellant: Shri Anil Topiwala (AR)For Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

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)

Shree Venkatramana Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Sullia vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1, Puttur

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

ITA 1515/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

Section 143(2)Section 58Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)