What is State Bank Of India v. CIT authority for?

Income arising from a cooperative society's surplus funds invested in short-term deposits and securities is not attributable to the society's core activities and, therefore, is not eligible for exemption under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

How many judgments cite State Bank Of India v. CIT?

817 judgments on BharatTax cite State Bank Of India v. CIT (389 ITR 578), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does State Bank Of India v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 80P(2)(d), Section 80P(2)(a)(i), Section 143(3), Section 80P(4), Section 80P, Section 263.

State Bank Of India v. CIT (389 ITR 578)

The Ludhiana Lic of India Employees Co-Operative Non-Agricultural Thrift & Credit Society Limited, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ludhiana

In the result, both the above appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 22/CHANDI/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jun 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी िव"म िसंह यादव, लेखा सद" एवं "ी परेश म. जोशी, "ाियक सद" BEFORE: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM & SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI, JM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO. 22 & 23/Chd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Ludhiana LIC of India बनाम The ITO Employees Co-operative Non- Ward-6(5) Agricultural Thrift & Credit Society Ludhiana Limited, LIC of India, Divisional Office, Urban Estate, Phase-1, Dugri, Ludhiana 141002, Punjab "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAAAL1738M अपीलाथ"…

Johnson & Johnson Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Add/JCIT (A)-5 Income Tax Department, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1473/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Meena

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ion 80P(2)(d) of the Act, by observing as under:- “7. Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in case of Pr. CIT & Anr. Vs. Totgar’s Co- operative Sale Society Ltd. (2017) 292 ITR 74 (Kar.) and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of State Bank of India vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj.) had also held that interest income earned by a co-operative society on its investment held with co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. We are of the considered view that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the denial of deduction by the AO to the assessee under section 80P(2)(d) of…

Nadiad Taluka Prathmik Shikshakoni Dhiran & Grahak Sahakari Mandali Limited, Nadiad vs. The PCIT-1, Vadodara

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 170/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…ITA No.170/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Page 1 of 6 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nadiad Taluka Prathmik PCIT-1, Shikshakoni Dhiran & Grahak Vadodara. Sahakari Mandali Limited A-1, Indira Complex, Nr. Laxmi Cinema Road, Vs. Nadiad – 387 001 (Gujarat) [PAN – AACAN 9966 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Mehul Thakkar, AR Revenue by Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 18.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement 14.06.2024 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Tarabai Park, Kolhapur vs. Kolhapur Zilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Limited, Kolhapur

ITA 301/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Pune10 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.0301/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolhapur . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Kolhapur Zilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Ltd. B-1 Midc, Gokul Shirgaon, Kolhapur-416234 Pan: Aaaak0230D . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Pranjal Phadnis [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Keyur Patel & Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 30/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10/06/2024 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Filed U/S 253(2) Of The Income Tax Act [‘The Act’] By The Revenue Challenges The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac/Cit(A)’] In Din & Order Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1058957688(1) Dt. 21/12/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Respective Orders Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mr Pranjal Phadnis [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Keyur Patel & Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253(2)Section 80GSection 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

…2) (d) of the Act. 12.1 Similar view has been taken by Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in case of Pr. CIT & Anr. Vs. Totgar’s Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. (2017) 292 ITR 74 (Kar.) and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of State Bank of India vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj.) wherein it is held that interest income earned by a co-operative society on its investment held with cooperative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. ITAT-Pune Page 3 of 6 ACIT Vs Kolhapur Zilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Ltd 12.2. In a more recent judgment dated 10-10-2023 Hon’ble Madras Hi…

Shree Gudaleshwar Gramin Bigar Sheti Sah Pat Sanshta Maryadit, Gudal, Radhanagari, Kolhapur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1), Kolhapur

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 406/PUN/2024[A.Y. 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri A.S. NaikFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…further find that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had held, that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006 also makes it clear beyond any scope of doubt that the purpose behind enactment of sub-…

Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Ahmednagar vs. Goreshwar Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Parner Dist. Ahmednagar

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 1191/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…further find that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had held, that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006 also makes it clear beyond any scope of doubt that the purpose behind enactment of sub-…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(1), Pune, Akurdi vs. Shri Bhairavnat Gramin Bigarsheti Patsanstha Maryadig, Landewadi

Appeal is dismissed in above

ITA 252/PUN/2024[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Gd Padmahshali

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…further find that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had held, that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still 16 ITA.No.252/PUN./2024 further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006 also makes it clear beyond any scope of doubt that the purpose b…

Rajat Apartments Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 19(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4329/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai27 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Girish Agrawal & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh Dadia, C.A RevenueFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 56Section 80P(2)(d)

…ataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. v. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society [2017] 78 taxmann.com 169/392 ITR 74 (Karnataka) and Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank of India v. CIT [2016] 72 taxmann.com 64/290 CTR 129/389 ITR 578/241 Taxman 163 (Gujarat), had also held that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments held with a co- operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006, as had been relied upon by the ld. A.R, also makes it clear beyo…

Rajat Apartments Co.Op. Housing Society, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 19(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4328/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai27 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Girish Agrawal & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh Dadia, C.A RevenueFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 56Section 80P(2)(d)

…ataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. v. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society [2017] 78 taxmann.com 169/392 ITR 74 (Karnataka) and Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank of India v. CIT [2016] 72 taxmann.com 64/290 CTR 129/389 ITR 578/241 Taxman 163 (Gujarat), had also held that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments held with a co- operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006, as had been relied upon by the ld. A.R, also makes it clear beyo…

Sadhana Sahakari Patpedhi Limited, Vasai, Palghar vs. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

ITA 57/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2024AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Unmesh NarvekarFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…We further find that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had also held that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006, as had been relied upon by the ld. A.R, also makes it clear beyond any scope of doub…

Sadhana Sahakari Patpedhi Limited, Palghar vs. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

ITA 56/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2024AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Unmesh NarvekarFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…We further find that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had also held that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006, as had been relied upon by the ld. A.R, also makes it clear beyond any scope of doub…

ITO-26(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sangli Vaibhav Co Operative Credit Society Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3770/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ketan L. VajaniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)(d)

…We further find that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon‟ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had also held that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006, as had been relied upon by the ld. A.R, also makes it clear beyond any scope of doub…

ITO-26(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sangli Vaibhav Co Operative Credit Society Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3769/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ketan L. VajaniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)(d)

…We further find that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon‟ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had also held that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006, as had been relied upon by the ld. A.R, also makes it clear beyond any scope of doub…

ITO-26(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sangli Vaibhav Co Operative Credit Society Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3766/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ketan L. VajaniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)(d)

…We further find that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon‟ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had also held that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006, as had been relied upon by the ld. A.R, also makes it clear beyond any scope of doub…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Udupi vs. Brahmavara Vyavasaya Seva, Brahmavara

ITA 668/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Ms. Akshaya K. S, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…the nature of income from other sources and not income from business and therefore the deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act cannot be allowed to the Assessee. The Hon'ble Court followed decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of SBI Vs. CIT 389 ITR 578(Guj.) in which the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court dissented from the view taken by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumkur Merchants case (supra). The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and Another Vs. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society (supra) had to deal with the following substantial que…

Incometax Officer, Ward 1, Udupi vs. Brahmavara Vyavasaya Seva, Brahmavara

ITA 667/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Ms. Akshaya K. S, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…the nature of income from other sources and not income from business and therefore the deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act cannot be allowed to the Assessee. The Hon'ble Court followed decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of SBI Vs. CIT 389 ITR 578(Guj.) in which the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court dissented from the view taken by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumkur Merchants case (supra). The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and Another Vs. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society (supra) had to deal with the following substantial que…

Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Udupi vs. Brahmavara Vyavayasaya Seva, Brahmavara

ITA 656/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 May 2024AY 2017-18

Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…the nature of income from other sources and not income from business and therefore the deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act cannot be allowed to the Assessee. The Hon'ble Court followed decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of SBI Vs. CIT 389 ITR 578(Guj.) in which the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court dissented from the view taken by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tumkur Merchants case (supra). The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and Another Vs. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society (supra) had to deal with the following substantial que…

Kundalika Nagari Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit, Roha vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Panvel

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 288/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: CA Ajinkya M VaishampayanFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…n'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income 11 ITA.No.288/PUN./2024 Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had held, that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006 also makes it clear beyond any scope of doubt that the purpose behind enactment of sub-…

Usha Janakalyan Nagar Chs Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer-30(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the appeal is allowed

ITA 4695/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalusha Janakalyan Nagar Vs. Ito-30(1)(1), Chs Ltd, Kautilya Bhavan, 211, Bkc, Bandra (E), Kharodi,Marveroad, Mumbai-400051. Malad (W), Mumbai-400095. Pan/Gir No. : Aaaau1039J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Kunal Lunawat.Ar Respondent By : Ms. Rajeswari Menon, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 15.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Cit (A) Passed U/Sec 154 & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri. Kunal Lunawat.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeswari Menon, Sr.DR

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…We further find that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had held, that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006, also makes it clear beyond any scope of doubt that the purpose behind enactment of sub-sectio…

Ganesh Vyapari Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Sangli vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Sangli

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 643/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri S.N. PuranikFor Respondent: Shri Kalpesh Kumar Rupavatiya

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…further find that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) and Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank Of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), had held, that the interest income earned by the assessee on its investments with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Still further, we find that the CBDT Circular No. 14, dated 28.12.2006 also makes it clear beyond any scope of doubt that the purpose behind enactment of sub-…

State Bank Of India v. CIT

What is State Bank Of India v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing State Bank Of India v. CIT

The Ludhiana Lic of India Employees Co-Operative Non-Agricultural Thrift & Credit Society Limited, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ludhiana

Johnson & Johnson Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Add/JCIT (A)-5 Income Tax Department, Mumbai

Nadiad Taluka Prathmik Shikshakoni Dhiran & Grahak Sahakari Mandali Limited, Nadiad vs. The PCIT-1, Vadodara

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Tarabai Park, Kolhapur vs. Kolhapur Zilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Limited, Kolhapur

Shree Gudaleshwar Gramin Bigar Sheti Sah Pat Sanshta Maryadit, Gudal, Radhanagari, Kolhapur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1), Kolhapur

Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Ahmednagar vs. Goreshwar Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Parner Dist. Ahmednagar

Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(1), Pune, Akurdi vs. Shri Bhairavnat Gramin Bigarsheti Patsanstha Maryadig, Landewadi

Rajat Apartments Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 19(3), Mumbai

Rajat Apartments Co.Op. Housing Society, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 19(3), Mumbai

Sadhana Sahakari Patpedhi Limited, Vasai, Palghar vs. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

Sadhana Sahakari Patpedhi Limited, Palghar vs. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

ITO-26(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sangli Vaibhav Co Operative Credit Society Limited, Mumbai

ITO-26(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sangli Vaibhav Co Operative Credit Society Limited, Mumbai

ITO-26(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sangli Vaibhav Co Operative Credit Society Limited, Mumbai

Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Udupi vs. Brahmavara Vyavasaya Seva, Brahmavara

Incometax Officer, Ward 1, Udupi vs. Brahmavara Vyavasaya Seva, Brahmavara

Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Udupi vs. Brahmavara Vyavayasaya Seva, Brahmavara

Kundalika Nagari Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit, Roha vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Panvel

Usha Janakalyan Nagar Chs Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer-30(1)(1), Mumbai

Ganesh Vyapari Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Sangli vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Sangli