TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 1793
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to it's members. It is registered under the Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960. It filed it's return of income on 27.09.2013 declaring total income at Rs. NIL by claiming deduction of Rs. 36,29,660/- u/sec.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Subsequently, the case of the assessee society was selected for scrutiny under CASS. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee society has gross total income of Rs. 36,29,660/- and claimed entire income as deduction u/sec.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act and filed it's Rs. NIL return of income. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee society has received interest income from it's investments with nati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ITA no.122/Nag./2023, order dated 18/06/2024, wherein the Tribunal has considered this issue in detail and held that interest income earned by the assessee trust is eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) / 80P2(d) of the Act. The relevant portion of the order reproduced below:- "9. Upon hearing both the counsel and perusing the record, we find that the issue involved is covered in favour of the assessee by a catena of decisions from ITAT as well as a decision of jurisdictional High Court. In this regard we may gainfully refer the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Solapur Nagri Audyogik Sahakari Bank Ltd. 182 Taxman 231 wherein the following question was raised. "Whether the intere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was considered by this Tribunal on similar grounds raised by the Revenue in the case of MSEB Engineers Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd., wherein the ITAT, Nagpur Bench, vide order dated 05/05/2016 held as under : "Upon hearing both the counsel and perusing the records, we find that the above issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of this ITA, referred by the Ld. CIT(A) in his appellate order. The distinction mentioned in the grounds of appeal is not at all sustainable. We further find that this Tribunal again in the case of Chhattisgarh Urban Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit Vs. ITO in ITA No. 371/Nag/2012 vide order dated 27.05.2015 has adjudicated similar issue as under:- "11. Upon careful consideration, we not t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y for business purposes, it was invested in specified securities. The question before us, is whether interest on such deposits/securities, which strictly speaking accrues to the members' account, could be taxed as business income under section 28 of the Act? In our view, such interest income would come in the category of 'income from other sources' hence, such interest income would be taxable under section 56 of the Act, as rightly held by the assessing officer....." 19.1 However, in the present case, on verification of the balance sheet of the assessee as on 31.3.2009, it was observed that the fixed deposits made were to maintain liquidity and that there was no surplus funds with the assessee as attributed by the Revenue. However,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ses of business and there were no surplus funds. 19.4 While comparing the state of affairs of the present assessee with that assessee (before the Supreme Court), the following clinching dissimilarities emerge, namely: (1) in the case of assessee, the entire funds were utilized for the purposes of business and that there were no surplus funds:- - in the case of Totgars, it had surplus funds, as admitted before the AO, out of retained amounts on marketing of agricultural produce of its members; (2) in the case of present assessee, it had not carry out any activity except in providing credit facilities to its members and that the funds were of operational funds. The only fund available with the assessee was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....), however, he has wrongly held that the interest income is taxable u/s 56 of the Act so do not fall under the category of exempted income u/s 80P of the Act. The adverse portion of the view, which is against the assessee, of ld. CIT(A) is hereby reversed following the decision of the Tribunal cited supra, resultantly ground is allowed. 8. We find that the ratio of above case also applies to the present case. As observed in the above case law, in this case also the submissions of the assessee's counsel is that the assessee society is maintaining operational funds and to meet any eventuality towards repayment of deposit the cooperative society is maintaining some liquidated funds as short term deposits with banks. Hence adhering to ....