Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 TMI Notes - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • Benami Property
  • Bill
  • Central Excise
  • Companies Law
  • Customs
  • DGFT
  • FEMA
  • GST
  • GST - States
  • IBC
  • Income Tax
  • Indian Laws
  • Money Laundering
  • SEBI
  • SEZ
  • Service Tax
  • VAT / Sales Tax
Types:
---- All Types ----
  • ---- All Types ----
  • Act Rules
  • Case Laws
  • Circulars
  • Manuals
  • News
  • Notifications
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Jurisdictional Prerequisites for Initiating Reassessment u/s 148: Non-Depoist of TDS by the Employer
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Revisiting the Scope of "Record" u/s 263: Embracing Subsequent Records
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting "Record": Revisiting the Scope of Revision Powers u/s 264 and Rectification of Mistake ...
    The Doctrine of Natural Justice in GST Proceedings: A Case Study on Show Cause Notice u/s 74"
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) and the Concept of "Plant" under GST: Supreme Court
    Case LawsCustoms
    Inordinate Delay in Adjudication: High Court's Stance on Quashing Show Cause Notices
    Case LawsCustoms
    Inordinate Delay in Adjudication: Upholding the Principles of Natural Justice
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Re-Assessment Notices Issued During COVID-19 Lockdown
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Unraveling the Mineral Rights Regime: The Supreme Court's Landmark Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Faceless Assessment Regime: A Judicial Perspective
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Evidentiary Value of Statements Recorded During Income Tax Surveys: A Judicial Analysis
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment: Ensuring Compliance with Statutory Provisions
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment Mechanism: Jurisdictional Limits in Income Tax Proceedings
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reassessment Notices for AY 2013-14: Upholding the Doctrine of Limitation
    Principles of Tax Fairness and Mens Rea: Quashes Penalty for Mere Technical Errors
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Decoding the Mandatory Timelines: A Thorough Examination of the Income Tax Assessment Order Nullific...
    Expiry of E-Way Bill AND Mens Rea: Technical Violation Alone Insufficient for Penalty Imposition
    Maintainability of Appeals: High Court Upholds Strict Interpretation of Limitation Provisions in GST...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Stay of Tax Demand: Interpreting the Discretionary Power u/s 220(6) of the Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting "Technical Services" under Tax Treaties: A Comprehensive Analysis
❯❯
MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

    +

    Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

    NOTE:

    Notes
    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
    Results Found:
    Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdictional prerequisite: notice in the name of a deceased person invalidates reassessment initiation under Section 148.
    A notice under Section 148 issued in the name of a deceased person is a jurisdictional defect because a valid notice to the correct person is a condition precedent to reopening an assessment; legal representatives have no statutory duty to intimate death; where salary tax has been deducted at source, reassessment cannot be pursued against the deceased or their representatives, and employer non-deposit of TDS does not create an outstanding demand against the assessee or their legal representatives.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revisional power: Commissioner may consider subsequent records available at time of examination in tax proceedings.
    The Court construed the Commissioner's revisional power to permit consideration of all materials relating to the proceeding that are available at the time of his examination, including documents and valuation reports that came on the file after the assessment order; the Explanation to the provision was read as clarificatory, giving an inclusive meaning to "record" rather than restricting it to what the Assessing Officer had when passing the assessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revision powers under section 264: Commissioner must consider expanded record and rehear revision petitions on merits.
    The Court held that the Commissioner must consider a revision petition on its merits and that the term record in revision proceedings extends beyond the return and assessment order to include material from other sources and prior assessments. It emphasised consistency in treatment of continuing transactions and required the Principal Commissioner to take into account all relevant materials, identify any apparent mistakes, afford a personal hearing, and pass a reasoned order within a short timeframe.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice in tax proceedings: show cause notices must allege fraud or concealment before enhanced recovery is invoked.
    The court quashed the enhanced-provision show cause notice for failing to allege the essential elements of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts and held that the enhanced regime may be invoked only when the adjudicating authority is prima facie satisfied of those elements and records that satisfaction in the notice; absent such express allegations the proceedings are without jurisdiction though fresh proceedings may be initiated with a proper notice.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Plant classification under GST: functionality test determines ITC eligibility for buildings serving special technical requirements.
    The expression plant or machinery in Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act must be interpreted by reference to functionality rather than by equating it with the statutory definition of "plant and machinery." A building qualifies as a plant for ITC purposes if, on the facts, it was planned and constructed to serve the assessee's special technical or operational requirements. The functionality test is fact-specific and requires case-by-case analysis of the building's role in the assessee's business.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication bars further proceedings on stale show cause notices absent a reasonable explanation.
    The court found the delay from 2008 to 2021 inordinate and unexplained, concluding the respondents did not provide a reasonable explanation; the delayed transfer to the call book without intimation breached statutory intimation requirements, and established precedent limits reliance on higher authority to excuse gross unexplained delays in adjudication of show cause notices.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication undermines procedural fairness and bars continuation of prolonged, unexplained proceedings.
    The court found that prolonged, unexplained delay in adjudicating a show cause notice breached procedural fairness and natural justice, causing irretrievable prejudice by impairing evidence preservation and business planning. Delay attributable to the revenue authorities, contrary to Tribunal directions for timely disposal, rendered continuance of proceedings unsustainable and emphasized the necessity of justifying delay and ensuring timely adjudication.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Pandemic relief legislation upheld: re-assessment notices issued during lockdown remain valid despite later procedural rule.
    The court interpreted the pandemic relief legislation as providing comprehensive relief that extended to procedural obligations in force at the time of issuance, not confined solely to extensions of time. It applied the principle that statutes operate prospectively and concluded the later-introduced procedural provision does not apply retrospectively to invalidate earlier-issued re-assessment notices, limiting its analysis to the validity of issuance and not the merits of re-assessment proceedings.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Central legislative competence over mineral regulation affirmed; royalties characterised as compensation for resource depletion, limiting state levies.
    The Court concluded that the central legislative framework occupies the field of mineral regulation and that royalties are compensation for depletion of state-owned natural resources, not conventional taxes; consequently the Centre may impose such levies while States remain constrained from imposing royalties in the nature of compensation that would encroach on the Centre's exclusive regulatory domain.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment mechanism requires reassessment steps to follow a centralized faceless procedure, otherwise territorial officer lacks jurisdiction.
    The Scheme framed under the enabling provision must be read to include preliminary proceedings linked to reassessment, so that reassessment initiation and related steps follow the faceless mechanism; concurrent exercise of territorial and faceless functions would undermine the Scheme's purpose and render steps taken outside the faceless protocol inconsistent with the statutory framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Evidentiary value of survey statements: survey disclosures lack conclusive weight and require independent corroboration.
    Statements recorded during a tax survey are permissive and not taken on oath, so they are not conclusive evidence by themselves; they cannot be treated as inherently incriminating material to justify reopening assessments or making additions without independent corroboration, and must be recorded free of coercion in line with administrative instructions and judicial precedents.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment jurisdiction: JAO lacked authority under the statutory faceless procedure, invalidating improperly issued notices.
    The court determined that reassessment notices and related proceedings were inconsistent with the statutory faceless assessment framework because they were issued without following the prescribed allocation of jurisdiction and procedural sequence under the faceless mechanism; administrative orders purportedly exempting cases were not read to displace the statutory requirements and earlier precedent interpreting the faceless provisions was applied.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless Assessment: statutory scheme governs jurisdiction and extends to central and international taxation proceedings.
    The court analysed Section 151A read with Sections 144B and 148A and held that administrative instructions dated March 31, 2021 and September 6, 2021 issued under section 119 apply only to assessment orders and do not extend to proceedings under Sections 148A and 148; those instructions cannot be read into the scheme notified on March 29, 2022. The mandatory faceless procedure under Sections 144B and 151A applies to notices and proceedings, including central charges and international taxation charges, and notices issued outside that mechanism fall outside the statutory jurisdictional framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Doctrine of limitation prevents revival of lapsed reassessment powers; administrative instructions cannot "travel back in time."
    The court held that when the right to reopen assessment had already lapsed under the pre amended limitation regime, subsequent amendments or administrative instructions could not revive that right; administrative attempts to "travel back in time" and extend limitation were invalid, assessees retain the defence of limitation, and pandemic era notifications did not cover years whose limitation had already expired.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Mens rea requirement in tax penalties: technical errors without intent cannot justify penalty imposition under GST compliance.
    Requirement of mens rea for imposition of tax penalties is central where e Way Bill compliance is questioned. Mere procedural or timing inconsistencies, without evidence of intent to evade tax and where valid tax invoices accompany the goods and tax has been charged, do not justify penal action. Authorities must establish culpable intent with cogent reasoning and comply with procedural and natural justice safeguards before imposing penalties.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Mandatory timelines under Section 144C require assessments to be completed within the prescribed month after DRP direction, else invalid.
    Once the DRP framed directions, the Assessing Officer was obliged to complete the assessment in conformity with those directions within one month from the end of the month in which the DRP's direction was served; service by uploading the DRP directive on the ITBA portal constitutes valid service for computing that period. The procedure does not envisage further involvement of the Transfer Pricing Officer once the DRP's direction is issued and an order under the transfer pricing provision has been remitted to the AO.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Mens rea requirement: technical expiry of an e way bill alone cannot justify a tax penalty without intent to evade.
    The court held that a purely technical lapse in E Way Bill formalities - where goods were otherwise covered by two e invoices and two E Way Bills and there was no dispute on consignor, consignee or goods - does not demonstrate the mens rea necessary to impose a penalty under the tax penal provision; authorities' focus on the expired E Way Bill alone was legally insufficient given documentary explanations and absence of intent to evade tax.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Exclusion of Limitation Act: GST Act's specific appellate time limits operate as a self contained code, barring general extensions.
    The court analysed whether the GST Act's appellate limitation regime operates as a complete code excluding the general Limitation Act. It applied the principle that fiscal statutes with detailed procedural and temporal rules are to be strictly construed, treating the special statute's limitation provision as implying exclusion of the Limitation Act's extension mechanism, and emphasised policy aims of expeditious dispute resolution, revenue certainty and administrative finality.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Assessing Officer discretion in granting stay of tax demand cannot be rigidly constrained by administrative OMs, requiring case specific consideration.
    The Assessing Officer's discretionary power under section 220(6) to grant stay of tax demand is not fettered by CBDT Office Memorandums; those OMs are administrative guidelines and do not mandate a uniform pre deposit. The AO must consider prima facie case, likelihood of success, and undue hardship and may require a higher, lower or no deposit depending on case specific facts. Administrative adjustment of refunds without considering a pending stay application was held arbitrary and the matter was remitted for reconsideration applying these principles.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Technical services interpretation requires specialized expertise and a demonstrable link to payments for withholding tax consequences.
    Interpretation of technical services under the India Ireland DTAA requires the application or transfer of specialized knowledge, skill or expertise; incidental training or assistance enabling a reseller to market standard software does not meet that threshold. The Reseller Agreement did not contemplate technology transfer or bespoke solutions, payments were tied to reseller net revenue, and the record lacked material linking remittances to customized technical services. Authorities must establish an evidentiary and contractual nexus between payments and provision of specialized technical services before applying withholding tax under the treaty.

    TMI Notes

    Back

    All TMI Notes

    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
      No Records Found

      TMI Notes

      Back

      All TMI Notes

      whatsappJoin Channel
      Showing Results for : Reset Filters

      Comparison of Section 149 "Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      3 September, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 149 Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

        At a Glance

        Clause 149 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) provides specified deductions for co-operative societies in computing total income. It enumerates categories of allowed deductions (business profits for specified activities, certain small-amount business profits, inter-co-operative income, letting of godowns, limited interest/house property income) and conditions relating to voting rights for societies engaged in labour/fishing activities. The provision affects co-operative societies (primary and others); effective date or commencement is Not stated in the document.

        Background & Scope

        Statutory hooks: Clause 149 sits in the chapter dealing with "Deductions in respect of certain incomes" in the Income Tax Bill, 2025. The clause is intended to grant specified tax deductions to co-operative societies on certain classes of income. The text provides coverage of the types of co-operative societies and activities that qualify, thresholds for small-value activities, and special treatment for income from investments in other co-operative societies. Clause 149(6) supplies three definitions: "consumers' co-operative society", "co-operative bank" and "primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank". No further definitions (e.g., of "primary society" or "federal co-operative society") are provided in the clause. Any wider contextual definitions or commencement/notification details are Not stated in the document.

        Statutory Provision Mode

        Text & Scope

        Clause 149(1) establishes that if the gross total income of an assessee that is a co-operative society includes income of the kinds listed in sub-section (2), the sums specified in sub-section (2) shall be allowed as deductions in computing total income "in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section."

        Clause 149(2) enumerates six categories of deductible sums:

        • Clause 149(2)(a): For co-operative societies engaged in specified activities (banking/providing credit to members; cottage industry; marketing of agricultural produce of members; purchase of agricultural implements/seeds/livestock for supply to members; processing without aid of power of members' agricultural produce; collective disposal of members' labour; fishing or allied activities), the whole of the profits and gains attributable to any one or more of such activities are deductible.
        • Clause 149(2)(b): For a primary society supplying milk, oilseeds, fruits or vegetables raised by its members to a federal co-operative society, Government/local authority, or specified Government companies/corporations, the whole of such business profits and gains are deductible.
        • Clause 149(2)(c): For co-operative societies engaged in activities not specified in (a) or (b), an amount of profits and gains attributable to such activities is deductible up to prescribed small thresholds-one lakh rupees for consumers' co-operative societies and fifty thousand rupees for others.
        • Clause 149(2)(d): Income by way of interest or dividends from investments with any other co-operative society is wholly deductible.
        • Clause 149(2)(e): Income derived from letting of godowns or warehouses used for storage, processing, or facilitating marketing of commodities is wholly deductible.
        • Clause 149(2)(f): For co-operative societies that are not housing societies, urban consumers' societies, transport societies, or societies performing manufacturing with aid of power, if gross total income does not exceed twenty thousand rupees, the amounts of income by way of interest on securities or any income from house property chargeable u/s 20 are deductible.

        Interpretation

        The clause adopts a categorical approach: specific activities enumerated in (2)(a) and (2)(b) receive full deduction of attributable business profits and gains. The drafting implies legislative intent to fiscally favour co-operative activities with social, agricultural or rural development character and primary cooperative supply chains. Clause 149(2)(c) recognises incidental or ancillary activities by permitting a capped deduction, signalling that only small-scale non-core business profits receive preferential tax treatment.

        Clause 149(4) provides that deductions under sub-section (1) relating to (2)(a), (b), (c) or sub-section (3) shall be allowed with reference to income after reducing the deduction u/s 80-IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, if the assessee is also entitled to that deduction - indicating an order of computation to avoid double advantage. The clause thereby contemplates interaction with pre-existing industrial/infrastructure related deductions (section 80-IA) and establishes netting off before applying cooperative deductions.

        Exceptions/Provisos

        Clause 149(3) conditions application of the sub-section dealing with collective disposal of labour and fishing/allied activities on the society's rules restricting voting rights to specified classes: (i) individuals who contribute labour or carry on fishing/allied activities; (ii) co-operative credit societies which provide financial assistance; (iii) the State Government. This is a membership/control test to ensure genuine member-based governance.

        Clause 149(2)(f) carves out several categories of societies (housing, urban consumers' societies, transport, manufacturing with power) from the small gross-income relief. The relief under (f) only applies if gross total income does not exceed twenty thousand rupees.

        Illustrations

        • Example 1: A primary milk co-operative supplying milk to a federal co-operative society has business profits of Rs. 500,000 attributable to that activity - under Clause 149(2)(b), the whole amount would be deductible when computing total income.
        • Example 2: A consumers' co-operative retail society derives Rs. 120,000 profit from an ancillary non-specified activity - under Clause 149(2)(c)(i), only Rs. 100,000 is deductible; the remaining Rs. 20,000 is taxable.
        • Example 3: A fishing co-operative's rules permit voting by outside investors - if voting is not restricted to classes listed in Clause 149(3), the special deduction for fishing activities under (2)(a)(vii) would not apply. (Whether this exact circumstance occurs is a fact; the clause makes the control condition explicit.)

        Interplay

        Clause 149 explicitly interacts with section 80-IA (Income-tax Act, 1961) by requiring deduction under 80-IA to be reduced first where applicable. Clause 149(6)(b) ties definitions of "co-operative bank" and "primary agricultural credit society" to Part V of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. Other cross-references (e.g., section 20 for house property) are internal to the tax code. No other Rules, Notifications or Circulars are referenced in the clause. Any further interaction with other deductions or eligibility conditions outside the clause is Not stated in the document.

        Differences between Section 149 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 and Clause 149 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version)

        • Cross-references to other deductions: Clause 149(4) (Bill) expressly refers to reduction of deduction u/s 80-IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, whereas Section 149(4) (Act) refers generically to "section 138".
          • Practical impact: The enacted provision substitutes a different cross-reference (section 138) which likely reflects renumbering/restructuring in the revised Act; taxpayers and practitioners must verify which contemporary provision (section 138) corresponds to former section 80-IA relief before applying the interaction rule.
        • Wording on application condition for certain societies: Clause 149(3) states "provisions of sub-section (2) shall apply when the rules and bye-laws... restrict the voting rights to the following classes of members," while Section 149(3) in the Act states the deduction in sub-section (1) applies only when the rules restrict voting rights to specified classes.
          • Practical impact: The Bill framed the condition as application of sub-section (2); the Act frames it as a condition for deduction under sub-section (1). Substance appears the same, but the enacted text is marginally clearer that the deduction itself is conditional - minimal practical effect except for drafting clarity in litigation or interpretation where reliance on the exact statutory linkage could arise.
        • Definitions: Clause 149(6) in the Bill contains express definitions for "consumers' co-operative society", "co-operative bank" and "primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank". Section 149 in the Act (Document 1) does not include clause (6) or these definitions.
          • Practical impact: The Bill's inclusion of definitions would assist interpretation; their absence in the enacted section may require cross-reference to other statutes (e.g., Banking Regulation Act) or general interpretation principles. This increases potential ambiguity for terms used in the enacted section.
        • Subsection numbering and internal references: Clause 149(3) refers to "provisions of sub-section (2)"; the Act's corresponding subsection reference is to sub-section (1) in one place, and the Act elsewhere has slightly different cross-references (e.g., section 20 in Act corresponds to "section 20" in Bill).
          • Practical impact: Potentially material if internal references were misaligned; practitioners must confirm which sub-section each condition attaches to when applying the enacted text.

        Practical Implications

        • Compliance/risk areas: Co-operative societies must allocate and document profits attributable to qualifying activities (particularly where societies undertake both specified and non-specified activities) to substantiate claims under (2)(a)/(b)/(c). For fishing/labour co-operatives, bye-laws restricting voting are a precondition - compliance requires careful governance documentation and possible amendment of bye-laws where necessary.
        • Interaction with other deductions: Entities claiming both section 80-IA and Clause 149 relief must compute netting as provided; failure to reduce the 80-IA deduction first may invite adjustment. Practitioners should keep explicit working papers showing order of deductions.
        • Record-keeping/evidence: Maintain minutes, registered bye-laws, membership rolls and voting rights records to demonstrate eligibility under Clause 149(3); maintain segmented accounting to show profits attributable to each activity and inter-cooperative investments for (2)(d); keep leases and purpose documentation for godown letting under (2)(e).

        Key Takeaways

        • Clause 149 provides targeted, often full, deduction of profits for co-operative societies engaged in specified agricultural, credit, cottage, marketing, processing (without power), labour-collective and fishing activities.
        • Primary societies supplying agricultural produce to federal co-operatives, government bodies or specified public companies receive full deduction for that business.
        • Non-specified activities qualify only up to modest monetary caps (Rs. 1,00,000 for consumers' co-operatives; Rs. 50,000 for others).
        • Income from investments in other co-operative societies and income from letting godowns used for marketing are fully deductible.
        • Special control/governance conditions apply for labour and fishing co-operatives; bye-laws restricting voting to specified classes are a precondition.
        • Deductions under Clause 149 must be computed after reducing deduction u/s 80-IA where applicable.
        • Definitions for key terms are included in Clause 149(6), aiding interpretation, but other definitional gaps remain and are Not stated in the document.

         


        Full Text:

        Section 149 Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax