IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR.BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT &

SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.1728 & 1923/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2020-21)

Mehsana Taluka Madhyamik Vs. Income Tax Officer, Teachers Credit and Consumers Ward-2, Sahakari Mandali, Mehsana.

15 to 18 Krushna Complex, (Present Ward-1, Mehsana)

rd

3 Floor Radhanpur Cross Roads, Mehasana-384002.

[PA N No.A(A अप A ील J ा M थ(cid:7278) 0 /A99pp1 N] ( (cid:7079)(cid:7004)यथ(cid:7278) /Respondent)

ellant Appellant by :

Respondent by:

Shri Mehal Doshi, A.R.

Date of Hearin Sghri Abhijit, Sr. DR Date of Pronouncement

08.12.2025 O R D E R

09.12.2025 PER: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT:

The captioned two appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide order dated 18.08.2025 for the Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2020-21. Since ITA No.1728/Ahd/2024 for AY 2015-16 the issue involved in these two appeals are common, we extract the for the purpose of adjudication.

grounds of appeal raised in ITA No.1728/Ahd/2024 for AY 2015-16

2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

1. Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law & facts in confirming the addition of Rs.1,89,556/- made by AO by way of disallowance u/s.80P in respect of interest income from Co-op. bank and CIT(A) further erred in presuming that addition made by AO was agreed by appellant.

ITA No.1923/Ahd/2025 for AY 2020-21

3. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

1. Ld.CIT(A0 has erred in confirming the order of AO for making addition of Rs.4,43,553/- by way of disallowance of claim u/s.80P(2)(d) in respect of interest income received by appellant co-op. credit society from co.op bank by considering it “not co.op. society”.

2. Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law in making disallowance u/s.80P(2) (d) by relying judgement of Karnataka High Court through the judgement of jurisdictional High court in favour of appellant was submitted during proceeding of CIT(A).

3. Ld.CIT(A) has erred in not considering the ground of appellant for the mistake in order of AO in computing assessed income by making addition on income computed u/s.143(1)(a) of Rs.18,93,700/- instead of computing on returned income of Rs.Nil.

4. Ld.CIT(A) has erred in not considering the mistake in computation sheet regarding figures of total income computed of Rs.50,43,930/- for computing tax as against assessed income of rs.23,37,253/-

4. The solitary issue required to be adjudicated by this Tribunal is that whether the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, for the interest received from the Co-operative Banks.

5. The issue before us is to determined whether the co-operative bank is also treated as co-operative societies for the purpose of allowing deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act. This issue stands settled by the order of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Ashwinkumar Arban Co-Operative Society Ltd, [2024] 168 taxmann.com 314 (Gujarat). For the sake of ready reference, snippets of the said order is reproduced below:-

“Section 80P, read with section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Deductions Income of co-operative societies (Interest from co- operative bank) Assessment year 2018-19- Principal Commissioner invoked revisional powers under section 263 on ground that Assessing Officer had allowed deduction on interest earned by assessee, a cooperative society, from investment made with a cooperative bank under section 80P(2)(d) which was erroneous and prejudicial to Interest of revenue Tribunal reversed Principal Commissioner's order holding that cooperative bank was a cooperative society registered under Gujarat State Cooperative Societies Act and, therefore, interest earned by assessee from said bank was eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(d) - Whether deduction under section 80P(2)(d) is available to cooperative societies on income earned as in