State Bank Of India v. CIT

389 ITR 578High Court2016#60 most cited

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.

817

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,421 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

State Bank of India v CIT · Section 80P(2)(a)(i) · Section 80P(2)(d) · cooperative society · investment income · exemption · short-term deposits · securities · surplus funds · not business income

Also reported as

72 Taxmann.com 64241 Taxmann 163

Sections most often in play

Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(a)(i)Section 143(3)Section 80P(4)Section 80PSection 263Section 250Section 2(19)

Issues it is cited on

section 80(2)(d)section 80(p)(2)(d)section 2(19)section 80p(4)section 194a(3)(v)section 80p(2)(c)section 80p(2)(a)(iii)section 80p(1)section 80p(2)(d)section 194a(3)section 80p(2)(a)(i)section 80p(2)

Judgments citing State Bank Of India v. CIT

Shri Vaibhavlaxmi Group Co. Op. Cotton Sale Gin @ Press Soc. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(2)(5), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 536/AHD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 80Section 80P

…ITA No.536/Ahd/2020 A.Y. 2017-18 Page 1 of 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Vaibhavlaxmi Group Co-op. vs. Income Tax Officer, Cotton Sale Gin & Press Soc. Ltd., Ward – 1(2)(1), Ahmedabad. P.O. Malanpur, Tal. Viramgam, Ahmedabad. [PAN – AAAAS 5378 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Mohit Balani, CA. Respondent by : Shri Mukesh Sharma, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 16.11.2022 Date of pronouncement : 30.11.2022 O R D E R This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order dated 16.09.202…

Mahim Vividh Karyakari Sahakari Society Ltd., Thane vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Thane

In the result we allow the ground no

ITA 1177/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sh. Anil SatheFor Respondent: Sh. Prakash mane, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P

…Rs. 75,38,534/- received from FDs with Co-operative Banks which was claimed by the assessee as deduction u/s. BOP(2)(d) of the Act. The Hon'ble Tribunal relying on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of State Bank of India Vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj.) wherein the Hon'ble High Court observed that the interest income earned by a co- Mahim Vividh Karyakari Sahakari Society Ltd. operative society on its investment held with a co-operative bank would be eligible for claim of deduction u/s. 80P (2) (d). Therefore, considering the aforesaid judicial pronouncements, the Audit objection raised…

Lokmangal Nagri Sahakari Path Sanstha Mydt, Solapur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax -4, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 231/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.231/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Lokmangal Nagri Sahakari Vs. Pcit-4, Pune. Path Sanstha Maryadit, 94/29, Mangal Plaza, Opposite Padma Talkies, Jodbhavi Peth, Solapur- 413002. Pan : Aaaal1241M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Girish Ladda Revenue By : Shri Ganesh Bare Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29.11.2022 : आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-4, Pune (‘The Pcit’) Dated 19.03.2022 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Ld. Pr. Cit Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Assuming The Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The It Act, More So When The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Is Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Girish LaddaFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.231/PUN/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Lokmangal Nagri Sahakari Vs. PCIT-4, Pune. Path Sanstha Maryadit, 94/29, Mangal Plaza, Opposite Padma Talkies, Jodbhavi Peth, Solapur- 413002. PAN : AAAAL1241M Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Girish Ladda Revenue by : Shri Ganesh Bare Date of hearing : 23.11.2022 Date of pronouncement 29.11.2022 : आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee dir…

Shr Arunoday Multi State Co-Op Cr Soc Ltd, Solapur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax - 4, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 229/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.229/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Arunoday Multi State Co- Vs. Pcit-4, Pune. Operative Credit Society Ltd., Arunoday 22 Veershaiv Nagar, Vij Apur Road, Jule Solapur, Solapur- 413001. Pan : Aakas8478H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Girish Ladda Revenue By : Shri Ganesh Bare Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29.11.2022 : आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-4, Pune (‘The Pcit’) Dated 28.03.2022 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Ld. Pr. Cit Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Assuming The Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The It Act, More So When The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Is Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Girish LaddaFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.229/PUN/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Arunoday Multi State Co- Vs. PCIT-4, Pune. operative Credit Society Ltd., Arunoday 22 Veershaiv Nagar, Vij Apur Road, Jule Solapur, Solapur- 413001. PAN : AAKAS8478H Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Girish Ladda Revenue by : Shri Ganesh Bare Date of hearing : 23.11.2022 Date of pronouncement 29.11.2022 : आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the a…

Maitri Heights Co-Op Hsg Society Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT/ ACIT, CPC Bangalore, Bangalore

ITA 2369/MUM/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234ASection 271Section 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 7 M/s. Maitri Heights Co-Op. Hsg. Society Ltd. 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…

M/S. Bharathi Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(3), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 793/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Prayadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…ill be in the nature of income from other sources and not income from business and therefore the deduction u/s.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 Court had to deal with the following substantial question of law: "(I)Whether the assessee, Totagar Co-operative Sale Society, Sirsi, is entitled to 100% deduction under Section 8…

Dharti Co. Operative Credit Society Ltd., Mehsana vs. The ACIT Circle Mehsana, Mehsana

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

ITA 486/AHD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.486/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2017-2018 Dharti Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., A.C.I.T., 1St Floor, Vs. Circle, Chirag Plaza, Mehsana. Nr. Manav Ashram Char Rasta, Visnagar Road, Mehsana-384001. Pan: Aaajd0461E

For Appellant: Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, with Shri G.M. Thakor, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R
Section 80P(2)(a)

…society from the non-members that will not be subject to deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. In holding so, I draw support and guidance from the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of State Bank of India versus CIT reported in 72 Taxmann.com 64 wherein it was held as under: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was also justified in holding that interest income of Rs.16,14,579/- and Rs.32,83,410/-respectively on deposits placed with State Bank of India was not exempt under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8.1 In view of the above, it is only the interest derived from…

Navodaya Nagri Pat Sanstha, Amravati vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -3, Amravati

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 66/NAG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur07 Nov 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. LoyaFor Respondent: Shri G. J. Ninawe
Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…n u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Punjab State Cooperative Federation of Housing Building Societies Ltd. 11 taxmann.com 448, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of State Bank of India Vs. CIT 389 ITR 578 (Guj.), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mantola Co-operative Thrift & Credit 5 Society Ltd. Vs. CIT 50 taxmann.com 278, the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd. 389 ITR 68 and the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Southern Eastern Employ…

The Ikkaraiboluvampatti Paccs 33, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ncw 4(2), Coimbatore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 461/CHNY/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.461/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S.Ikkaraiboluvampatti Paccs, V. The Income Tax Officer, 33, Rajaji Street, Non-Corporate Ward-4(2), Coimbatore. Coimbatore. [Pan: Aaaai 3699 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.J.Saravanan, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.10.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.11.2022

For Respondent: Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.461/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s.Ikkaraiboluvampatti PACCS, v. The Income Tax Officer, 33, Rajaji Street, Non-Corporate Ward-4(2), Coimbatore. Coimbatore. [PAN: AAAAI 3699 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Mr.J.Saravanan, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by :…

M/S Jal Ratan Deep Co-Operative Housing Society, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 31(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2351/MUM/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh ()

Section 1Section 115JSection 143Section 250Section 80Section 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. 8_(W(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- sect…

M/S Jal Ratan Deep Co-Operative Housing Society, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 31(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2350/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh ()

Section 1Section 115JSection 143Section 250Section 80Section 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. 8_(W(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- sect…

M/S Jal Ratan Deep Co-Operative Housing Society, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 31(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2349/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh ()

Section 1Section 115JSection 143Section 250Section 80Section 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. 8_(W(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- sect…

M/S Jal Ratan Deep Co-Operative Housing Society, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 31(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2348/MUM/2022[201-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2022

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh ()

Section 1Section 115JSection 143Section 250Section 80Section 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. 8_(W(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- sect…

Sharda Urban Credit Co-Op Society Ltd., Amravati vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Amravati

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 386/NAG/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Oct 2022AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. Loya, CA (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri G.J. Ninawe (through virtual)
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…-op. Society A.Y. 2008-09 Act. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Punjab State Cooperative Federation of Housing Building Societies Ltd. 11 taxmann.com 448, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of State Bank of India Vs. CIT 389 ITR 578 (Guj.), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mantola Co-operative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd. Vs. CIT 50 taxmann.com 278, the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd. 389 ITR 68 and the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Southern Eastern Employees…

Shri Amirgadh Vibhag Mota Kadas Vidhya Karyakari Co. Op. Soc. Ltd., Amirgadh vs. The ITO, Ward-5, Palanpur

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 125/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.125/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2017-2018 Shri Amirgadh Vibhag Mota Kadas Income Tax Officer, Vidhya Karyakari Co-Op Soc. Ltd., Vs. Ward-5, 01 Shri Amirgadh, Palanpur. Amirgadh, Amirgadh-385130. Pan: Aaajs0264J

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R
Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…society from the non-members that will not be subject to deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. In holding so we draw support and guidance from the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of State Bank of India versus CIT reported in 72 Taxmann.com 64 wherein it was held as under: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was also justified in holding that interest income of Rs.16,14,579/- and Rs.32,83,410/-respectively on deposits placed with State Bank of India was not exempt under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 9.1 In view of the above, it is only the interest derived from…

Jilla Panchayat Na Karmacharioni Dhiran Ane Grahak Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Bhavanagar vs. The ACIT Circle-1, Bhavanagar

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 108/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.108/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2017-2018 Jilla Panchayat Na Karmacharioni Dhiran The A.C.I.T., Ane Grahak Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Vs. Circle-1, 0, Motibaug Road, Bhavnagar. Near Town Hall, Bhavnagar-364001. Pan: Aacaj3104B

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R
Section 234ASection 270ASection 56Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…society from the non-members that will not be subject to deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. In holding so we draw support and guidance from the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of State Bank of India versus CIT reported in 72 Taxmann.com 64 wherein it was held as under: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was also justified in holding that interest income of Rs.16,14,579/- and Rs.32,83,410/-respectively on deposits placed with State Bank of India was not exempt under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 9.1 In view of the above, it is only the interest derived from…

Datta Digambhar Co Operative Credit Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi

ITA 1819/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Kartik Golekar,A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anul Gupta, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Vs. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karn) 7 M/s. Datta Digambhar Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. 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…

Income Tax Officer -17(2) (1), Mumbai vs. Mittal Court Premises Co.Op.Society Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1537/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sunil M. LalaFor Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…rned by the Cooperative Society from the investments made with the Cooperative Banks is eligible for claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act:- 1. Pr.CIT VS. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society (2017) 392ITR 74 (Karn) 2. State Bank of India vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj) 3. Lady Ratan Tower Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. vs. ITO in ITA No. 1152/Mum/2018 in decision dated 09.08.2018. 4. Shree Mahadeshwar Sahakari Patpedhi Maryadit vs. ITO in ITA No. 374/Mum/2018 dated 06.03.2019. 5. Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Premises Co-operative Society vs. ITO in ITA No. 6547/Mum/2017 dated 25.04.2018. A.Y. 2014-15 to 2016…

Income Tax Officer -17(2) (1), Mumbai vs. Mittal Court Premises Co.Op.Society Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1536/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Sunil M. LalaFor Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…rned by the Cooperative Society from the investments made with the Cooperative Banks is eligible for claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act:- 1. Pr.CIT VS. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society (2017) 392ITR 74 (Karn) 2. State Bank of India vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj) 3. Lady Ratan Tower Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. vs. ITO in ITA No. 1152/Mum/2018 in decision dated 09.08.2018. 4. Shree Mahadeshwar Sahakari Patpedhi Maryadit vs. ITO in ITA No. 374/Mum/2018 dated 06.03.2019. 5. Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Premises Co-operative Society vs. ITO in ITA No. 6547/Mum/2017 dated 25.04.2018. A.Y. 2014-15 to 2016…

Income Tax Officer-17(2) (1), Mumbai vs. Mittal Court Premises Co.Op. Society Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1535/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Sunil M. LalaFor Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…rned by the Cooperative Society from the investments made with the Cooperative Banks is eligible for claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act:- 1. Pr.CIT VS. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society (2017) 392ITR 74 (Karn) 2. State Bank of India vs. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj) 3. Lady Ratan Tower Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. vs. ITO in ITA No. 1152/Mum/2018 in decision dated 09.08.2018. 4. Shree Mahadeshwar Sahakari Patpedhi Maryadit vs. ITO in ITA No. 374/Mum/2018 dated 06.03.2019. 5. Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Premises Co-operative Society vs. ITO in ITA No. 6547/Mum/2017 dated 25.04.2018. A.Y. 2014-15 to 2016…