BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

16 results for “capital gains”+ Section 80p(2)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore176Mumbai102Panaji70Raipur50Delhi47Hyderabad28Chennai27Cochin25Pune25Kolkata24Jaipur19Lucknow18Ahmedabad16Visakhapatnam13Surat12Chandigarh11Indore6Nagpur6Telangana5Cuttack4Amritsar3Karnataka3Kerala3Rajkot3SC3Varanasi3

Key Topics

Section 80P(2)(a)40Section 80P21Section 80P(2)(d)17Section 143(3)14Deduction14Section 8013Addition to Income12Section 5611Disallowance10

GANDHINAGAR DISTRICT CO.OP.MILK PRODUCERS UNION LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE GANDHINAGA, GANDHINAGAR

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

ITA 513/AHD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.513/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-21 Gandhinagar District Co- The Asst.Cit बनाम/ Op.Milk Producers Union Ltd. Circle, Gandhinagar V/S. K. Road, Gidc Electronics Estate Sector-25, Gandhinagar Gujarat – 382 024 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaajg 1061 B (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

d) of the Act. 6.3. Section 80P(2)(c) of the Act provides a standard deduction for co- operative societies engaged in activities that are not specifically covered Gandhinagar District Co-op.Milk Producers Union Ltd. vs. ACIT. Asst. Year : 2020-21 under Section 80P(2)(a) or (b). Specifically, it allows a deduction of up to Rs.50

Section 143(2)7
Section 2637
Exemption3

SHREE RAM CO.-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,,DAHOD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 98/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jan 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

gain of business attributable to such activities will be deductible. Earning of interest income from Bank is not activity for which income would be deductible. Therefore, the interest income earned from bank/co-operative bank amounting to Rs. 82,21,635/- was treated as income from other sources u/s. 56 of the act on which deduction u/s. 80P was disallowed. 3. Aggrieved

SARDAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD 3(1)(3),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2156/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2156 & 2157/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-2014 & 2014-2015 Sardar Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd Ito, ‘’B’’, Alankar Apartment, Ward 3(1)(3), Vs. Parkarwada, Dandia Bazar, Baroda. Vadodara. Pan: Aaabt2648D

For Respondent: Shri Vinod Talwani, Sr.DR
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeals have been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the two order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 3, Vadodara [CIT(A) in short] of even dated 31/07/2017 arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here

SARDAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD 3(1)(3),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2157/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2156 & 2157/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-2014 & 2014-2015 Sardar Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd Ito, ‘’B’’, Alankar Apartment, Ward 3(1)(3), Vs. Parkarwada, Dandia Bazar, Baroda. Vadodara. Pan: Aaabt2648D

For Respondent: Shri Vinod Talwani, Sr.DR
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeals have been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the two order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 3, Vadodara [CIT(A) in short] of even dated 31/07/2017 arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here

THE GOVERNMENT SERVANTS CO.-OP. CREDIT LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(1),, VADODARA

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

ITA 108/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

capital and bank interest was eligible for tax exemption u/s 80P of the act. The assessing officer has not accepted the explanation of the assessee and stated that providing credit facilities to its member was a separate and distinct activity from the banking activity. Consequently the assessing officer has treated the interest income earned from nationlised banks /co-operative banks amounting

BARODA CITIZEN COMMUNITY CO. OP. CREDIT SCOIETY LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

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

ITA 996/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 996 & 1051/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Baroda Citizen Community Co-Op. Credit I.T.O, Society Ltd., Vs. Ward-1(2)(2), 203, 2Nd Floor, Baroda. Ivory Terrace, R.C. Dutt Road, Vadodara.

For Appellant: Shri NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 56Section 80P(2)(a)

D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned two appeals have been filed at the instance of the Assessee for the different assessment years against the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Vadodara, arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here

BARODA CITIZEN COMMUNITY CO. OP. CREDIT SCOIETY LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

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

ITA 1051/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 996 & 1051/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Baroda Citizen Community Co-Op. Credit I.T.O, Society Ltd., Vs. Ward-1(2)(2), 203, 2Nd Floor, Baroda. Ivory Terrace, R.C. Dutt Road, Vadodara.

For Appellant: Shri NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 56Section 80P(2)(a)

D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned two appeals have been filed at the instance of the Assessee for the different assessment years against the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Vadodara, arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here

THE KHEDA TALUKA SHIKSHAK MANDLI LIMITED,,KHEDA vs. THE PR. CIT-2,, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1030/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish, CIT.DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Vadodara [Ld.CIT in short], dated 02/03/2017 arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SABARKANTHA CIRCLE,, HIMATNAGAR vs. THE SABARKANTHA DISTRICT CO.-OP. MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD.,, HIMATNAGAR

Appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2401/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jan 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80P(2)(d)Section 8O

80P(2(d) of the Act. Therefore, we feel no need to interfere with the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) and the same is hereby upheld.” During the year as submitted by the assessee in its submission before the ld. CIT(A) discussed at page no. 15 of the CIT(A)’s order that assessee was having

THE DY. CIT., ANAND CIRCLE,, ANAND vs. M/S. KAIRA DIST. CO.-OP. MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD.,, ANAND

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2218/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2218/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 D.C.I.T, M/S. Kaira District Co-Op. Milk, Anand Circle, Vs. Producers Union Ltd., Anand. Amul Dairy Road, Anand-388001. Pan: Aaaak8694F

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Shah A.R
Section 143(3)Section 15Section 32(1)Section 36Section 80P(2)(d)

80P(2)(d) held that assessee cannot borrow the money for temporary investment. He has also submitted that even Gujarat High Court in assessee's own case while dealing with issue of re-opening u/s. 148 for disallowing the deduction of interest observed that AO is conscious about the claim made by the assessee and the position of interest earned

GUJARAT FISHERIES CENTRE CO .OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION LIMITED,,AHMEDABDA vs. ITO, WRAD-5(2)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 232/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jun 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Jignesh Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-D.R
Section 263Section 271Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)

D.R. Date of hearing : 05-04-2022 Date of pronouncement : 15-06-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-5 vide order dated 24/03/2017 passed for the assessment year 2012-13. I.T.A No. 232/Ahd/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 Page

THE CO. OP.CREDIT SOCIETY OF VISANAGAR LTD,VISANAGAR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-PATAN, PATAN

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1484/AHD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 250(6)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

80P(2)(d) of the Act. Therefore, considering the negative effect of this decision of the Hon'ble High Court, the appellant has made an alternative claim that once it is decided that such interest is taxable in the hands of the appellant, then the proportionate expenditure is to be allowed. As per the working provided by the appellant

BARODA DIST. CO.OP. MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA

In the result assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 3283/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Manish Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Karnani, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(iv)

80P(2)(iv) of the Act. The assessee had not debited indirect expenses from the same and therefore relying on the judgment of Gandevi Taluka Khedut Sahakari Sangh Ltd.-vs-CIT reported in 76 Taxman 36 Guj (1994) on the ratio that deduction u/s 80(P)(2)(a)(iv) was to be allowed on net profit and gain

BARODA DIST. CO.OP. MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA

In the result assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 3282/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Manish Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Karnani, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(iv)

80P(2)(iv) of the Act. The assessee had not debited indirect expenses from the same and therefore relying on the judgment of Gandevi Taluka Khedut Sahakari Sangh Ltd.-vs-CIT reported in 76 Taxman 36 Guj (1994) on the ratio that deduction u/s 80(P)(2)(a)(iv) was to be allowed on net profit and gain

GUJARAT VEPARI MAHAMANDAL SAHKARI AUDYOGIK VASAHAT LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 288/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri M. S. Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Agal, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

capital gain of Rs. 16,28,950/-. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not dealing of ground of appellant in regards to a deduction allowable U/S 80-P of the Act of Rs. 13,49,634/-. Gujarat Vepari Mahamandal Sahkari Audyogik Vasahat Ltd. vs. ITO, A.Y. 2022-23 6. The appellant craves liberty

M/S. ISCON MEGACITY MEMBERS ASSOCIATION ,,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMP. ), BHAVNAGAR

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

ITA 1290/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1290/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Tushar P.Hemani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

D E R PER SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER : The Assessee is in appeal before us against the order of Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-XXI, Ahmedabad [‘CIT(A)’ in short] dated 05/02/2014 passed for Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11. 2. The Registry has pointed out that the appeal is time barred by 15 days. In order to explain