JANYUVAK KALYAN COOP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 27(1)(5) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2734/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 July 2026AY 2017-184 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the relief claimed by the assessee had already been granted by the CIT(A) in a subsequent order. Therefore, the present appeal had become infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged the disallowance of deduction under Section 80P. Subsequent to filing the appeal, the CIT(A) granted the relief sought by the assessee in a separate order.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 80P and whether the CIT(A) erred in disallowing it.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 80P(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN

PER SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. NFAC DELHI vide DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1084561959(1) dated 08- Jan-2026 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

ITA 2734/MUM/2026 JANYUVAK KALYAN COOP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, 1 the learned CIT(A) erred in disallowing deduction of Rs 41,23,830/- under section 80P of the Income tax Act, 1961.

2.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, 2 the Learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant society is hit by the provisions of section 80P(4) of the Act.

3.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the appellant is a co-operative credit society and not a co-operative bank as defined under the Banking Regulation Act 1949.

4.

The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend OR withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.

2.

Ground Nos. 1 to 3 are interrelated and interconnected and relates to challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in disallowing the deduction under Section 80P of the Act. Therefore, I have decided to adjudicate these grounds through the present consolidated order.

3.

At the very outset, it was stated at the Bar by the Ld. AR that certain new developments have taken place subsequent to the filing of the present appeal. Ld. AR placed on record a copy of the order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 24.02.2026, wherein the relief with regard to the deduction claimed under Section 80P of the Act has already been granted to the assessee.

4.

Since, for the year under consideration, the deduction claimed by the assessee has already been allowed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 24.02.2026, in view of the said decision, the present appeal filed by the assessee has become infructuous and is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous.

ITA 2734/MUM/2026 JANYUVAK KALYAN COOP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD

5.

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 31.07.2026.

Sd/- SANDEEP GOSAIN JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai Dated: 31.07.2026 RY-SrPS

ITA 2734/MUM/2026 JANYUVAK KALYAN COOP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD

Copy to: JANYUVAK KALYAN COOP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD, F/A 1, MUKTI NAGAR, GHATLA, WAMAN 1 TUKARAM PATIL MARG CHEMBUR MUMBAI, MUMBAI-400071, MAHARASHTRA

ITO WARD 27(1)(5) MUMBAI, INCOME TAX OFFICE VASI RAILWAY 2 STATION BUILDING NAVI MUMBAI, MUMBAI-400071, MAHARASHTRA

3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →