DARED SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI LIMITED,BHAVNAGAR, GUJARAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad Has Arisen From The Separate Appellate

condoned either by the statutory authorities or by the courts.” 4.3 The ld. CIT(A) held that claim of deduction u/s. 80P claimed by the assessee in the return of income not filed u/s. 139(1) of the Act cannot be allowed, and since the assessee has filed return of income belatedly beyond the due date prescribed u/s 139(1

DARED SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI LIMITED,BHAVANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad Has Arisen From The Separate Appellate

condoned either by the statutory authorities or by the courts.” 4.3 The ld. CIT(A) held that claim of deduction u/s. 80P claimed by the assessee in the return of income not filed u/s. 139(1) of the Act cannot be allowed, and since the assessee has filed return of income belatedly beyond the due date prescribed u/s 139(1

MUNCIPAL SERVANT CO. OP CREDIT AND SUPPLY SOC. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CPC , BENGLURU

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

1), it is not eligible for the deduction claimed u/s 80P of the Act as per the provisions of section 80AC (ii) of the Act. Further, the appellant has not obtained condonation of the said delay in filing the return of income from CBDT as per the provisions of section 119(2)(b

MUNCIPAL SERVANT CO. OP CREDIT AND SUPPLY SOC. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CPC , BENGLURU

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

1), it is not eligible for the deduction claimed u/s 80P of the Act as per the provisions of section 80AC (ii) of the Act. Further, the appellant has not obtained condonation of the said delay in filing the return of income from CBDT as per the provisions of section 119(2)(b

VOLARK LEASING IFSC PVT. LTD,GUJARAT vs. ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, GUJARAT, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Gupta

1) of the Act, but the Audit Report in Form No. 10CCB was made available before the A.O. before he completes the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act, therefore, we are of the view that the A.O. ought to have considered the said Audit Report filed by the assessee and allow the deduction claimed by the Assessee u/s 80IA

SHRI MODHESHWARI BACHAT DHIRAN ANE GRAHAK SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(PREVIOUSLY WARD-5), PALANPUR

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

condonation of delay which is illegal and bad-in-law. I.T.A No. 1977/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 3 Shri Modheshwari Bachat Dhiran Ane Grahak Sakhakri Mandli Ltd. Vs. ITO [3] The appellant therefore requests your Honour to kindly delete the addition of Rs. 3,88,405/- being the interest amount received from the co.op. bank made

THE THAVAR DUDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI MANDLI LIMITED,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

1)(b) of the Act and claiming Nil income for the Asst. Year 2018-19. Whereas the assessee has shown the Second PAN Number in the bank accounts, whereby the Assessing Officer held that no Return of Income filed by the assessee for the I.T.A Nos. 1555 &1556/Ahd/2024 A.Ys. 2018-19 & 2019-20 Page No 3 The Thavar Dudh Utpadak

THE THAVAR DUDH UTPADAK SAHKARI MANDLI LIMITED,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE- GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

1)(b) of the Act and claiming Nil income for the Asst. Year 2018-19. Whereas the assessee has shown the Second PAN Number in the bank accounts, whereby the Assessing Officer held that no Return of Income filed by the assessee for the I.T.A Nos. 1555 &1556/Ahd/2024 A.Ys. 2018-19 & 2019-20 Page No 3 The Thavar Dudh Utpadak

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

B” BENCH Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member ITA No. 232 /Ahd/2018 Assessment Year 2012-13 Gujarat Fisheries Central Pr. Commissioner of Co. Operative Association Income Tax-5, Ltd. Sakar-S 2 to 4, Nehru Vs Ahmedabad Bridge Corner, Ashram (Respondent) Road, Ahmedabad PAN: AABAG5675M (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri Jignesh Parikh, A.R. Revenue

KOTH GROUP CO.OP. URBAN CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: The Appellate Authority & Therefore, The Addl/Jcit(A) Ought To Have Deleted The Adjustment Made U/S 143(1)(A)(V) By Ao.Cpc & Allowed The Deduction U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) Of Rs.5,20,000/-.

b) to condone the delay, that does not deprive the appellant to pursue the remedy by way of appeal before the appellate authority and therefore, the Addl/JCIT(A) ought to have deleted the adjustment made u/s 143(1)(a)(v) by AO.CPC and allowed the deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of Rs.5,20,000/-. 5. That in the facts

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. KOTA BARAN TOLLWAY PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.2025/Ahd/2018 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Kota Baran Tollway Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, 222, Advait Complex, Nr. Circle-2(1)(2), Sandesh Press Road, Ahmedabad Vastrapur, Ahmedabad [PAN No.AAECK2595B] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR Respondent by: Shri

CHILODA SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (PREVIOUSLY WARD-5), GANDHINAGAR

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2017-18

B. Patel, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 09-07-2025 Date of pronouncement : 07-10-2025 आदेश/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member: This is an appeal filed against the order dated 21-03- 2025 passed by CIT(A)/Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Hyderabad for assessment year 2017-18. 2. The grounds of appeal

ITO MEHSANA WARD 5 KADI, KADI vs. THE GOZARIA PEOPLES CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, GOZARIA

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21 Ito, Mehsana Ward-5 The Gozaria Peoples Co-Operative Kadi. Vs Credit Society Ltd. 2, Main Bazar At Gozariya Ta. Mehsana 383 825 Gujarat. Pan : Aaajt 1283 G (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri B.K. Patel, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Durga Dutt, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

1) of the Act. 3. The assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) condoned the delay of 183 days in filing the appeal, considering the rural nature of the assessee's operations and the impact of ex parte assessment. On merits, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the entire additions on the following reasoning: The liabilities

THE SHUKLATIRTH SEVA SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,BHARUCH vs. THE ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD, VADODARA

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

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamble

Delay Condoned These two appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the separate appellate orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2010-11; i.e. one arising out of the appellate order dated 27.12.2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income

THE SHUKLATIRTH SEVA SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,BHARUCH vs. THE ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD, VADODARA

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

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamble

Delay Condoned These two appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the separate appellate orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2010-11; i.e. one arising out of the appellate order dated 27.12.2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income

THE UNJHA TALUKA CO. OP. SALES PURCHASE UNION LTD.,UNJHA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 18.07.2025 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi vide order dated