Which cases are most cited on Section 80P?

Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO (322 ITR 283) — 1,283 citing judgments; Pr. CIT v. Totagars (395 ITR 611) — 1,074 citing judgments; Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT (431 ITR 1) — 999 citing judgments; State Bank Of India v. CIT (389 ITR 578) — 817 citing judgments; Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. v. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (392 ITR 74) — 762 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 80P?

BharatTax indexes 5,069 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 80P of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.149

Section 80P of the Income-tax Act, 1961 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 is Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. v. ITO (322 ITR 283), cited in 1,283 of the 5,069 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80P

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.

Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT

384 ITR 490 · 2016 · High Court

631

citing judgments

Co-operative banks are not fundamentally different from co-operative societies, entitling them to claim deductions under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, including for interest income treated as business income.

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.

Judgments on Section 80P

Ed281 Kuttaithayirpalayam Milk Producers Cooperative Society, Erode vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Erode

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

ITA 430/CHNY/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.429 & 430/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-2020 Ed281 Kuttaithairpalayam Milk Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Producers Co-Operative Society, Ward 1(1), Vadakkuthairpalayam Post, Chithode Erode. Via, Erode Taluk, Tamil Nadu 638 102. [Pan:Aaaae6749D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.05.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi Both Dated 03.02.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2018-19 & 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Has Filed The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 On 30.03.2019 Admitting Nil Income After Claiming Deduction Under Section 80P Of The Income Tax Act

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

Ed281 Kuttaithayirpalayam Milk Producers Cooperative Society, Erode vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Erode

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

ITA 429/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2023AY 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

Shri Siddhanath Nagari Sahkari Patsanstha Marya, Satara vs. Pr. CIT-3, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 180/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri J.R. ChandekarFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

Tuljabhavani Nagri Sahkari Patpehi Ltd, Panvel vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Thane

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 501/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Shiv Shanti Nagri Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Pune vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune-2, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 490/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Solapur Zilla Madyamik Shikshak Sevakva Sahakari Pata Sanstha, Solapur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 456/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Girish LaddaFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Pradeshik Manorugnalaya Karmachary Sahakari Patha Sanstha, Pune vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 453/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Shivamrut Doodh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Maryadit, Solapur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune-4, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 452/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Deepak SasarFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Pimpri Chinchwad Vidyut Kramchari Sahakri Pathanstha Maryadit, Pune vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 408/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Deepak SasarFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Sudhakarpanth R. Paricharak Gramin Bigarsheti Pat Sanstha, Solapur vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -4, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 381/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri S.N. PuranikFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Pune Vibhag Madhyamik Shikshak Patsanstha Ltd, Satara vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -3, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 377/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Shri Sharad Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pathasanstha Ltd, Pune vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune-4, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 282/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri B.B. ManeFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Gramin Sewa Sahakri Samiti Maryadit, Dharsiwa, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer 1(2), Raipur

ITA 89/RPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: None (written submissions)For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)

Gramin Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Champajhar, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-1(1), Raipur

ITA 88/RPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: None (written submissions)For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)

Gramin Sewa Sahakari Samiti (Maryadit), Gaurbhat, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-1(2), Raipur

ITA 87/RPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: None (written submissions)For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)

The Government E Co-Operative Society Ltd., Bharuch vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Vadodara-1, Vadodara

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 126/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.126/Srt/2023 (Ay 2017-18) (Hearing In Virtual Court) The Government E Co- Principal Commissioner Of Operative Society Ltd./, Income Tax, Vadodara-1, Vs First Floor, Government Room No.214, 2Nd Floor, Sevasadan, Bhag-2, B/H Aaykar Bhawan, Race Course Pwd Office, Bharuch- Circle, Vadodara-390007 392001 Pan No. Aaalt 0832 D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Hindalco Employees Coop Credit Society Ltd, Taloga vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Thane

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 500/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Suvarnyug Gramin Bigar Sheti Sah Patsanstha Marya Nimgaonketki, Pune vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune-4, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 495/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Abhay A AvchatFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Mohol Nagari Sahakari Pat Purvatha Sanstha Maryadit, Solapur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax -4, Pune

Appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 227/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.227/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Mohol Nagari Sahakari The Principal Patpurvatha Sanstha Maryadit, Vs Commissioner Of Income Marketyard Mohol, Tal. Mohol, Tax, Pune. Dist. Solapur – 413213. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaaam 1185 F Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri S N Puranik – Ar Revenue By Shri Sardar Singh Meena - Dr Date Of Hearing 13/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22/05/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pune Dated 26.03.2022 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Pr. Commissioner Has Erred Both On Facts As Well As Law In Initiating Proceeding U/S 263 & Passing Order Under U/S 263, Without Application Of Mind. Mohol Nagari Sahakri Patpurvatha Sanstha Maryadit [A]

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)

Kishorepur Paschimanchal S K U S Limited, Hooghly vs. I.T.O., Ward - 23(1), Hooghly

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 716/KOL/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 716/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Kishorepur Paschimanchal Skus Limited Income Tax Officer, Bandipur, Malay Bandipur Ward-23(1), Hooghly Vs B.O. Bandipur Hooghly - 712617 [Pan : Aacak9370Q] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/05/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 13/10/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Revised Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Denial Of Benefit Of Section 80P To The Tune Of Rs. 6,32,082/- By A.O. (Cpc) On The Ground Of Belated Filing Of Return Of Income. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Appreciated That The Delay In Filing Of Return Of Income Was Occasioned Due To Reasons Beyond The Control Of The Assessee. 3. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Appreciated That The Denial Of Benefit U/S 80P On Account Of Delay In Filing Return Of Income Was Beyond The Jurisdiction Of The A.O. (Cpc) While Exercising Power Of Processing Return Of Income U/S 143(1).” 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Received An Intimation From Cpc, Bangalore U/S 143(1) Of The Act Making An Adjustment In Returned Income By Which Cpc Did Not Grant Deduction U/S 80P Of The Act At Rs. 6,32,082/- Claimed By

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(ii)Section 250Section 80P