Turnover-Based TDS Threshold for Co-operative Societies Upheld as Constitutional | HC
- Blog|News|Income Tax|
- 4 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 20 November, 2025

Case Details: Vellangallur Peoples Welfare Co-Operative Society Ltd. vs. Union of India [2025] 180 taxmann.com 412 (Kerala)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Ziyad Rahman A.A., J.
-
C.A. Jojo, S. Jiji, Mathews Joseph, Smt. Swathy S., O.D. Sivadas, K.J. Manu Raj, Ravi Krishnan, Smt. K. Vinaya, Remya Murali, Hareesh M.R., Rasmi Nair T., T.T. Biju, Smt. T. Thasmi, Smt. M. J. Anoopa, Dr K.P. Pradeep, Sanand Ramakrishnan, Sanu S Malakeel, M.M. Monaye, M. Paul Varghese, K.S. Hariharan Nair, Rajath R Nath, Smt. G. Remadevi, Smt. Harima Hariharan, A. Chandra Babu, Avijith A. V, Smt. Prejitha S. Salim & Smt. Aparna Saraswati, Advs. for the Petitioner.
-
Vishnu Pradeep, ESM. Kabeer, K. Vidyasagar, Gilbert George Correya, P.R. Ajith Kumar, Praveen K. V., D. Somasundaram, Smt. Jayasree K.P., Devaprasanth P.J., John Joseph, Christopher Abraham, Shoby K. Francis, A.K. Haridas, K.M. Sathyanatha Menon, Smt. Kavery S. Thampi, Navaneeth. N. Nath, Thomas Abraham, M. Sasindran, Smt. Stinnie John & R. Muraleekrishnan (Malakkara), Advs. for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioners were primary agricultural credit societies and were not required to deduct TDS on income received or credited as interest on deposits. However, as per Finance Act, 2020, an amendment was brought in respect of the co-operative societies, which was to the effect that, in case the total sales, gross receipts or turnover of the co-operative societies exceed 50 crores rupees, during the financial year immediately preceding to the financial year referred to sub-section (1) of Section 194A, such interest amount shall be subjected to TDS under section 194A.
The petitioners contended that the introduction of a Rs 50 crore criterion practically deprives them of the benefit originally granted to them. This is because all their deposits are to be compulsorily made with the Kerala Bank, being the Apex Society, and the gross turnover of the Kerala Bank exceeds Rs. 50 crores: all income received by the petitioners by way of deposits with the Kerala Bank is subject to TDS.
Thus, the said proviso introduces an unreasonable classification that violates the principles enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Aggrieved by the introduction of the said proviso, the petitioner filed a writ petition before the Kerala High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the petitioners’ claim of tax exemption was not absolute. Instead, it was a deduction permissible for such a Society upon submission of the returns. Since the benefit under Section 80P is not an exemption from paying tax but a benefit of deduction subject to the compliance of the terms and conditions, including filing of return, it cannot be held that there is no tax liability at all for the petitioners under the Act.
Therefore, the benefit of exemption from payment of TDS was not an absolute exemption from tax. It was a benefit of deduction subject to compliance with the terms and conditions, including the filing of the return. Thus, the argument that the amendment imposed a condition for collecting TDS on such income was found illegal and arbitrary and rejected.
List of Cases Reviewed
- CIT, New Delhi v. Eli Lilly & Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. [2009] 223 CTR 20/312 ITR 225/178 Taxman 505 (SC) (para 17) distinguished
List of Cases Referred to
- Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT, Calicut [2021] 123 taxmann.com 161/431 ITR 1/279 Taxman 75 (SC) (para 7)
- Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Smt. P. Laxmi Devi AIR 2008 SC 1640 (para 11)
- Union of India v. Elphinstone Spinning and Weaving Co. AIR 2001 SC 724 (para 11)
- Shell Company of Australia v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation 1931 AC 275 (298) (para 12)
- CIT, New Delhi v. Eli Lilly & Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. [2009] 223 CTR 20/312 ITR 225/178 Taxman 505 (SC) (para 13)
- Union of India v. N.S. Rathnam & Sons [2015] 60 taxmann.com 342/322 ELT 353/51 GST 852/34 GSTR 38 (SC) (para 13)
- Union of India v. Ganpati Dealcom (P.) Ltd. [2022] 141 taxmann.com 389/447 ITR 108/289 Taxman 177 (SC) (para 13)
- Ashirvad Films v. Union of India (2007) 6 SCC 624 (para 13)
- Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017) 9 SCC 1 (para 13)
- M. R. F. LTD. v. INSPECTOR, KERALA GOVERNMENT, and others. [1999] 1998 taxmann.com 2257/94 FJR 130 (SC) (para 13)
- K.T. Moopil Nair v. State of Kerala AIR 1961 SC 552 (para 13)
- R.K. Garg/R.K. Karanjia/Madhu Mehta/P.K. Soi/S.S. Bedi v. Union of India [1981] 25 CTR 406/[1982] 133 ITR 239/[1981] 7 Taxman 53 (SC) (para 15)
- Swedish Match AB v. Securities and Exchange Board (2004) 11 SCC 641 (para 21)
- West Derby Union v. Metropolitan Life Assurance Company 1897 AC 647 (HL) (para 21)
- Jennings v. Kelly 1940 AC 206 (para 21)
- S. Sundaram Pillai v. V. R. Pattabhiraman (1985) 1 SCC 591 (para 22)
- Dwaraka Prasad v. Dwaraka Das Saraf (1976) 1 SCC 128 (para 23)
- Hiralal Rattanlal v. State of U.P (1973) 1 SCC 216 (para 24)
- CITes v. Ramkishan Shrikishan Jhaver AIR 1968 SC 59 (para 26)
- Murthy Match Works v. CCE (1974) 4 SCC 428 (para 30)
- Asianet Satellite Communication v. State of Kerala 2012 (4) KLT 431 (para 30)
- Union of India v. Nitdip Textile Processors (P.) Ltd. [2011] 15 taxmann.com 59/245 CTR 241/203 Taxman 1 (SC) (para 30)
- Ajmera Housing Corpn. v. CIT [2010] 193 Taxman 193 (SC)/[2010] 326 ITR 642 (SC) (para 33)
- ROHITASH KUMAR v. OM PRAKASH SHARMA [2013] 11 taxmann.com 699/136 FLR 92 (SC) (para 33)
- Union of India v. M.V. Valliappan [1999] 155 CTR 193/238 ITR 1027/105 Taxman 605 (SC) (para 33)
- Bengal Immunity Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar AIR 1955 SC 661 (para 33).
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied

CA | CS | CMA