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
    Upholding the Transfer of Assessment Proceedings u/s 127: A Judicial Perspective
    Case LawsService Tax
    Navigating the Taxation Labyrinth: The Supreme Court's Guidance on Transfer of Right to Use Goods
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Supreme Court Upholds Forfeiture of Earnest-Money Deposits under SARFAESI Rules
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    The Generality vs. Enumeration Principle: A Key to Interpreting Delegated Rule-Making Power: Validit...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Share Premium Addition u/s 68: Demystifying Share Premium Transactions
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Intricacies of Income Tax Penalty u/s 271(1)(c): Fairness in Tax Administration
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Ensuring Fair Procedure before declaring Fraud in Bank Loan: Providing Relevant Documents and Opport...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reassessment Proceedings: Navigating the Scope and Limitations under Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Complexities of Search and Seizure Assessments: Unraveling the Intricacies of Section...
    Decoding the Judgement: Navigating the Complexities of ITC Eligibility under the GST Regime
    Excess stock found during survey: Navigating the Intricacies of UPGST / CGST Act and Invoking Wrong ...
    Striking a Balance: Judicial Interpretation of GST Provisions on Record-Keeping and Penalties
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Interim Orders and the Limits of Article 142: Safeguarding Natural Justice Balancing Judicial Powers...
    Upholding Fairness and Transparency in Insolvency Resolution: A Landmark Judgment on the IBC
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Supreme Court Clarifies Vicarious Liability of Directors in Cheque Dishonour Cases
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Interim Compensation in Cheque Dishonor Cases: Discretion and Due Process, Scope of the word "May"
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Unraveling the Principles of Delay Condonation: A Comprehensive Analysis by the Supreme Court
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting Section 80G Provisions: ITAT's Stance on Charitable Institution Registration
    Case LawsCustoms
    Monetary Limits for Filing Appeals: Analyzing the CESTAT Judgment on Binding Nature of CBIC Instruct...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting the Scope and Limits of Sections 153A and 153C: A Judicial Perspective
❯❯
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
    Transfer of assessment proceedings for coordinated investigations and administrative convenience upheld where procedural safeguards and factual links exist.
    The judgment explains that transfers of assessment proceedings pursuant to the statutory transfer power may be justified for coordinated enquiries and administrative convenience, provided the decision is not capricious or mala fide. Authorities must afford an opportunity to be heard and consider objections; where factual indicia exist - for example, disclosed transactions such as unsecured loans with searched persons - centralisation can be sustained. The convenience of the assessee is relevant but subservient to effective adjudication and tax collection, and transfers supported by procedural compliance and factual nexus are not arbitrary.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer of right to use goods: contracts retaining operational control are service arrangements, not deemed sales under VAT.
    The issue is whether supply agreements for cranes, trailers and tank trucks amount to a transfer of the right to use goods under the deemed sale provision. Applying the five BSNL tests-availability of goods, consensus on identity, transferee's legal right to use, exclusivity of use, and non transferability by owner-the contracts failed to meet the criteria. Contractors retained possession, crew, fuel, maintenance and liability, and transferees had only permissive use without effective control, so the arrangements were services, not deemed sales under VAT/sales tax.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Forfeiture of earnest-money deposits under SARFAESI rules stands as a statutory consequence, limiting equitable intervention.
    The analysis affirms that Rule 9(5) of the SARFAESI Rules prescribes an express statutory forfeiture of earnest-money deposits arising from auction terms, and that Sections 73 and 74 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, addressing contractual damages, do not apply to such statutory forfeitures. Unjust enrichment and equitable considerations cannot supplant a clear statutory forfeiture, and subsequent recovery by the secured creditor does not negate the forfeiture, except in narrowly defined exceptional circumstances where equity may justify relief.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Generality vs. enumeration principle affirms broad delegated rule making power, upholding rules that further an Act's statutory purposes.
    The Court held that Rule 9(3) is intra vires because the general delegated rule making power in section 29A(1) authorises rules that carry out the Act's purposes even when not covered by enumerated heads. Applying the generality vs. enumeration principle, the Court found the enumerated matters in section 29A(2) illustrative and not restrictive, and concluded Rule 9(3) furthers the misconduct chapter's object of maintaining ethical standards and preventing wrongful threshold dismissal of genuine complaints.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Burden of proof in share premium cases: failure to prove investor identity and genuineness sustains addition under section 68.
    The assessment of share premium under section 68 requires the assessee to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of investors who subscribe at a premium. The court scrutinised disparate allotments made on consecutive days, examined subscribing companies' financials, and applied the doctrine of "source of source" restrictively, holding that incorporation papers or bank payments alone do not discharge the burden. Absent cogent evidence tracing funds to lawful origin and demonstrating commercial rationale for large premiums, additions under section 68 are supportable.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Strict construction of penalty provisions prevents penalty where taxpayer disclosed omitted income before assessment notice.
    The legal focal point is whether Section 271(1)(c) can be invoked where an assessee disclosed omitted income and paid differential tax before initiation of reassessment. Penal provisions require strict construction, and Explanation 1 treats a pre-notice satisfactory explanation and admission of additional income as accepted, precluding characterization as concealment. Additionally, a penalty notice must specify the particular ground for proceeding; failure to do so renders the notice defective and undermines the basis for penalty.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Right to be heard: affected parties must receive documents underlying fraud allegations and be allowed inspection and rebuttal.
    Classification of a loan account as fraud invokes the Principles of Natural Justice, requiring disclosure of the documents forming the basis of a Show Cause Notice and inspection access to bank and Resolution Professional records so the affected party can identify required documents, receive copies, and submit a meaningful reply within specified timelines, with scope to request a personal hearing.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Scope of reassessment: AO may address newly noticed income but remains constrained by the recorded reasons for reopening.
    Where the AO has recorded reasons to believe income escaped assessment, the AO may assess or reassess issues that come to notice during reassessment, but if no additions or modifications are ultimately made in respect of the issues that formed the basis for reopening, the AO cannot make additions or modifications relating solely to other matters that were part of the original assessment. Explanation 3 applies only after reassessment power is validly invoked and cannot be used to deviate from or supplant the recorded reasons.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Corroboration requirement for search statements: unsupported search statements cannot sustain additions without linked incriminating material and fair cross examination.
    Additions for alleged accommodation entries cannot rest solely on statements recorded during search operations; such statements require corroboration by material found in the search that is specifically linked to the assessee. The assessing officer must articulate a factual nexus between seized group material and the assessee, and procedural fairness-including provision of relevant statements and opportunity for cross-examination-is essential. Cure provisions do not validate jurisdictional defects arising from absence of requisite notice or lack of incriminating material.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit eligibility clarified: refund for unutilised ITC limited to inverted duty where input goods tax exceeds output supplies.
    The court construes Section 54(3) narrowly: refund of unutilised ITC for inverted duty arises only where tax on input goods exceeds tax on output supplies. It upholds the constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) and Section 16(4), confirms that ITC is subject to legislatively prescribed conditions and time limits, and clarifies that the non-obstante clause in Section 16(2) does not override separate restrictions such as Section 16(4). Affected petitioners may invoke circulars and have eligible ITC claims processed where returns met the prescribed extended filing position.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Determination of tax on unaccounted stock must proceed under Sections 73 and 74, not Section 130.
    The Court held that tax determination for excess or unaccounted stock discovered in a survey must proceed under the statutory assessment procedures for undisclosed goods rather than by invoking the survey provision. The assessment code prescribes the exclusive mechanism for quantifying and demanding tax, and survey powers cannot be used to supplant the prescribed steps for computation, notice and imposition of tax or penalty on unaccounted goods.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Record-keeping obligations: failure attracts a capped statutory penalty and invalidates arbitrary confiscation without due process.
    The judgment emphasises that registered persons must maintain prescribed books and electronic records under Section 35 and related rules, and that any determination of tax on unaccounted goods must follow the show cause procedures for assessing tax liability. It finds that conditions for confiscation under Section 130 were not met and that penalties must be imposed in accordance with the statutory bifurcation in Section 122, with the offences in question attracting only the capped penalty, thereby underscoring procedural limits on enforcement powers.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Limits on Article 142: extraordinary power cannot automatically vacate interim stays; natural justice and supervisory jurisdiction must be preserved.
    Limits on the Supreme Court's extraordinary jurisdiction were defined to prevent blanket, time based vacation of interim stays; equitable power cannot deprive non parties of substantive benefits or negate the right to be heard. The Court confined vacation rules to cases where interim relief was granted without notice, instructed High Courts to grant limited ad interim relief, prioritise vacation applications, avoid routine time bound disposal directives, and recognised that past automatic vacations that led to concluded trials raise finality concerns while endorsing judicial superintendence and natural justice as constitutional constraints.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Insolvency plan compliance: failure to acknowledge creditor claims or secure approvals undermines approved resolution plans.
    The court held that a recall application grounded in lack of notice and alleged misrepresentation is maintainable under principles of natural justice. It found the resolution plan non-compliant with Section 30(2) read with Regulations 37 and 38-specifically for failing to acknowledge a creditor's claim, misrecording the payable amount, omitting secured creditor classification despite a charge, and proposing use of third-party statutory land without necessary approvals-deficiencies that materially affected the plan's transparency and treatment of creditor classes.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Vicarious liability of directors clarified: specific averments required to link a director to company affairs before liability attaches.
    The Court held that vicarious liability of a director in cheque dishonour cases cannot be invoked by merely reproducing statutory language or alleging directorship; complaints must contain specific factual averments showing how the director was responsible for or in charge of the company's day to day affairs to link the director to issuance or dishonour of negotiable instruments.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Interim compensation discretion: courts must prima facie assess claims and defences before ordering payment under Section 143A.
    The Court interpreted Section 143A(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act as conferring a discretionary power to order interim compensation, holding that the word "may" cannot be read as mandatory. Courts must prima facie assess the complainant's case and the accused's defence; the presumption under section 139 alone does not suffice. Interim compensation may be directed only when a prima facie case is established, with the quantum determined after considering transaction nature, parties' relationship, and the accused's paying capacity, and brief reasons must be recorded.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: courts require sufficient cause, balancing strict limitation rules with liberal remedial discretion.
    Principles of condonation of delay require balancing the Limitation Act's public policy against stale litigation: Section 3 is to be strictly interpreted while Section 5 is to be construed liberally to allow judicial discretion where sufficient cause is shown. Discretion remains limited by considerations such as inordinate delay, negligence, and lack of due diligence, and prior decisions granting condonation do not automatically justify relief unless the factual matrices are substantially similar.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Registration under Section 80G: provisional approval permits subsequent final registration regardless of prior commencement of activities.
    The Tribunal held that institutions granted provisional approval under the First Proviso to Section 80G(5) are entitled to apply for final registration under the proviso's final-registration clause, and that the relevant date of commencement is to be counted from activities undertaken after grant of provisional registration; a prior commencement of activities before provisional grant cannot alone justify rejection of a final-approval application.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Binding nature of departmental instructions vs natural justice: tribunals may prioritize procedural fairness over monetary thresholds.
    The CESTAT held that CBIC instructions bind departmental officers but do not bind courts and tribunals, which must safeguard natural justice. The Tribunal found the appellate order defective for failing to remit valuation reassessment to the proper officer as statutorily required, treated related Bills of Entry as a single transaction for monetary limit calculation, and invoked its procedural power to hear departmental appeals on merits despite the Board's monetary threshold.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Search assessment provisions under Sections 153A and 153C override ordinary reassessment time limits; asset-threshold verification required.
    The judgment holds that search-triggered assessment provisions function as non-obstante clauses displacing ordinary reassessment time limits, distinguishes the enduring liability to tax from the temporal right to assess, prescribes that block periods are computed from the year of search (or date of receipt of seized records for non-searched persons), and treats the asset-represented income threshold as a mandatory, aggregable precondition requiring the assessing officer's recorded satisfaction.

    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