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

Jagannath Karbarh Deshapran Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., Egra, Purba Medinipur vs. I.T.O., Ward - 27(4), Haldia

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 667/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 667/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jagannath Karbarh Deshapran Skus Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Jagannath Karbarh Ward-27(4), Haldia Vs Pirijkhanbarh Egra Purba Medinipur -721422 [Pan : Aacaj0089M] 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 22/09/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Revised Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Action Of The A.O. (Cpc) In Denying Deduction U/S Section 80P To The Tune Of Rs. 15,31,190/- For Belated Filing Of The Return Of Income. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Considered That The Reason For Belated Filing Of Return Of Income Was Beyond The Control Of The Society. 3. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Considered That The Issue Was Debatable & The Adjustment U/S 143(1) Was Not Permissible In Law.” 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. 15,31,190/- Claimed

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

Shrimant Jaysingrao Ghatge Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd, Kolhapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(5), Kolhapur

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 488/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Gaikwad

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P

Shri Bhagwant Sahakari Nagari Patsanstha Maryadit Barshi, Solapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Solapur

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 487/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

For Appellant: Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Gaikwad

Section 2(19)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 8P(2)(a)

Namdeo Kadam Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd, Satara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Satara

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 472/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

For Appellant: Ms. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Gaikwad

Section 143(3)Section 2(19)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

Namdeo Kadam Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd, Satara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Satara

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 471/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

For Appellant: Ms. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Gaikwad

Section 143(3)Section 2(19)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

Shree Basaveshwar Credit Co-Op Society Limited, Hungund vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bagalkot

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

ITA 241/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2023AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri.Ravishankar S. V, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 234ASection 234CSection 4oSection 80P(2)(a)Section 8o

The Lalgudi Sivagnanam Agricultural Producers Co-Op. Mkg Society Limited, Trichy vs. DCIT, Circle -1 (1), Trichy

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

ITA 948/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.948/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Lalgudi Sivagnanam Agricultural Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Producers Mkg Society Ltd., Income Tax, 171, Lalgudi, Tiruchirapalli 621 601. Circle 1(1), Trichy. [Pan:Aaaat0204A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate [Erode] ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Chandrasekaran, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.05.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 21.09.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: 1) The Order Of The Learned Cit(A) Is Bad & Erroneous In Law & Against The Principles Of Natural Justice. 2) The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Not Considering The Written Submissions Filed By The Appellant In Proper Perspective. 3) The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Not Considering The Vital & Material Fact That Out Of The Denial Deduction U/S.80P(2)(E), Rs.2,38,907/- Pertains To 2

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate [Erode]For Respondent: Shri S. Chandrasekaran, JCIT

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

Maharashtra Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Kolhapur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Kolhapur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 383/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Gaikwad

Section 144Section 250Section 80P

Sholapur District Police Employees Credit Co- Operative Siciety, Solapur vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 376/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 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 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Solapur Zilha Prathamik Shikshak Sahakari Sanstha Niyamit, Solapur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune-4, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 370/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 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 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

The Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Pune vs. Vasantrao Naik Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha, Pune

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 368/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 May 2023AY 2018-19

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

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

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)