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.

36 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 80P(2)(a)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai190Pune165Chennai135Cochin127Bangalore118Panaji62Kolkata39Ahmedabad36Raipur29Jaipur28Nagpur26Hyderabad23Delhi21Chandigarh20Visakhapatnam20Lucknow19Indore17Surat16Rajkot13Patna4Jabalpur2Jodhpur1Amritsar1Guwahati1Agra1SC1

Key Topics

Section 80P69Section 80P(2)(d)35Deduction33Section 80P(2)(a)23Section 25022Section 15420Section 143(3)19Addition to Income17Section 263

VIJAY CREDIT AND SUPPLY CO. OP. SOCIETY,DHOLKA vs. THE PR. CIT-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 187/AHD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divetia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee. 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed return of income for A.Y. 2016-17 declaring total income at Rs. NIL and had claimed deduction under Section 80P of Rs. 79,59,325/-. 7. The case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed

Showing 1–20 of 36 · Page 1 of 2

16
Section 14716
Disallowance13
Limitation/Time-bar11

THE ORCHID HEIGHTS CO.OP HOUSING SERVICE SOCIETY LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 26/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms Suchitra Kamblethe Orchid Heights Co-Op Income Tax Officer, Vs. Housing Service Society Ward-3(3)(5), Limited, Ahmedabad. Applewood Township, Nr. Shantipura Circle, Ahmedabad-382210.. [Pan :Aagat8437 K] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri M J Ranpura, Ar Respondent By: Shri Suresh Chand Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09.07.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:- Delay Condoned This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Appellate Order Dated 29.04.2024 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeals:

For Appellant: Shri M J Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Chand Meena, Sr. DR
Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

Delay Condoned This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 29.04.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The ground of appeal mentioned hereunder are without prejudice to one another. 2

THE MODASA DHANSURA TALUKA TEACHERS CO.OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,ARVALLI vs. THE ACIT, HMT CIRCLE, HIMATNAGAR PRESENT JURISDICTION THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1478/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1478/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Modasa Dhansura Taluka The Acit बनाम/ Teachers Co-Op.Credit Hmt Circle, Himatnagar V/S. Society Ltd. Present Jurisdiction - S/43, 2Nd Floor The Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1)(1) Shyam Sunder Complex Ahmedabad – 380 015 Station Road, At & Po Modasa Ta. Modasa Aravalli 383 315 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Aabat 2852 M अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhinal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

condone the delay and decide the case to be adjudicated on merits. 8.2. The AR submitted that the disallowance was incorrect and that the interest income from S. K. District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. qualifies for deduction under Section 80P(2

THE SALESTAX EMPLOYEES CO.OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 612/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad , Which Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 16-10-2023 In Din

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep G Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 253(3)

condone the delay of 111 days and proceed to adjudicate this appeal on merits in accordance with I.T.A No. 612/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Page No. 5 The Sales Tax Employees Co.Op. Credit Society ltd. v. ACIT law. Reference is drawn to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Collector of Land Acquisition, Court in the case of Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji

KHERALU TALUKA PRIMARY TEACHERS CO. OP. CREDIT SOCIETY NIYAMIT,MEHSANA vs. NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURISDICTION -THE ITO, WARD-1, PATAN

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

ITA 1235/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Adjournment Application filedFor Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Kheralu Taluka Primary Teachers Co. Op. Society Niyamit vs. ITO Asst. Year –2018-19 - 2– 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any ground or grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 3. At the outset, we note that the present

THE VISNAGAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-GANDHINAGAR (PREVIOUSLY DCIT, PATAN CIRCLE, PATAN), GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 738/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.738, 1414 & 1415/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : (2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) The Visnagar Nagarik Sahakari The Assistant Commissioner Bank Ltd.,(Under Liquidation) बनाम Of Income Tax, / Market Yard, Circle Gandhinagar. V/S. Visnagar, (Previously Dcit, Mehsana-384315, Patan Circle, Patan) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaaft8764C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A P Nanavaty, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] These Three Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”], All Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Arising From The Assessments Framed By The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle, Patan [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Assessing Officer Or Ao”] Under Section 143(3) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri A P Nanavaty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(4)

condonation of delay however also examined the matter on merit and dismissed the appeal. For other two assessment years also the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on merit. The assessee raised multiple grounds before CIT(A). In the first ground, it was contended that the AO had erred in disallowing deduction under section 80P amounting

THE VISNAGAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD (UNDER LIQUIDATION),MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-GANDHINAGAR (PREVIOUSLY DCIT, PATAN CIRCLE, PATAN), GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1414/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.738, 1414 & 1415/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : (2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) The Visnagar Nagarik Sahakari The Assistant Commissioner Bank Ltd.,(Under Liquidation) बनाम Of Income Tax, / Market Yard, Circle Gandhinagar. V/S. Visnagar, (Previously Dcit, Mehsana-384315, Patan Circle, Patan) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaaft8764C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A P Nanavaty, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] These Three Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”], All Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Arising From The Assessments Framed By The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle, Patan [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Assessing Officer Or Ao”] Under Section 143(3) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri A P Nanavaty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(4)

condonation of delay however also examined the matter on merit and dismissed the appeal. For other two assessment years also the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on merit. The assessee raised multiple grounds before CIT(A). In the first ground, it was contended that the AO had erred in disallowing deduction under section 80P amounting

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)

80P(2)(d) of the Act. The PCIT issued show cause notice dated 14.03.2022 for Assessment Year: 2017-18 Page 3 of 6 proposed revision of the Assessment Order under Section 263 of the Act. As the assessee has not filed any response, the PCIT held that the Assessment Order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act dated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AAYKAR BHAWAN VEJALPUR, PRAHLAD NAGAR vs. SABARKANTHA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE MILK PORODUCERS UNION LIMITED, MILK PRODUCERS UNION

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1589/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Dsouza, CIT DR & B.P. Srivastava
Section 32Section 32(1)(ii)Section 80P(2)(d)

condoned on due consideration of facts and owing to smallness of delay causing no perceptible prejudice to other side. 3. The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal are as under: “ITA No. 1588/Ahd/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17) 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AAYKAR BHAWAN VEJALPUR vs. SABARKANTHA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS UNION LIMITED, MILK PRODUCERS UNION LIMITED

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1588/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Dsouza, CIT DR & B.P. Srivastava
Section 32Section 32(1)(ii)Section 80P(2)(d)

condoned on due consideration of facts and owing to smallness of delay causing no perceptible prejudice to other side. 3. The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal are as under: “ITA No. 1588/Ahd/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17) 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified

THE KHEDBRAHMA TALUKA PRIMARY TEACHERS CO.OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,HIMATNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, HIMATNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 115/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad , Which

For Appellant: Shri Rushin Patel, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253(3)Section 80P(2)(d)

condone the delay of 9 days and proceed to adjudicate this appeal on merits in accordance with law. Reference is drawn to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji (1987 AIR 1353(SC)). 3. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in Memo of Appeal filed with

SHREE YOGESHWAR CO. OP. CREDIT SOC. LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4 PRESENT WARD-1, PATAN

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

ITA 1383/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Years:2018-19

Section 144Section 234ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

condonation of delay along with an affidavit. It is explained that the assessee is a cooperative credit society Shree Yogeshwar Co. Op. Credit Soc. Ltd. Vs.ITO, AY- 2018-19 2 engaged in business of giving loan to its members and that its income was exempt under section 80P

RANDHEJA DUDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3 NOW WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 649/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Guptaasstt. Year : 2017-18 Randheja Dudh Utpadak The Ito, Ward-3 Sahakari Mandli Ltd. Vs Now Ward-1 To-Randheja Gandhinagar. Tal: Gandhinagar Pin : 382 620 Pan : Aacar 5164 K (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short Referred To As Ld.Cit(A)] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 22.11.2021 Pertaining To Asst.Year 2017-18. 2. The Registry Has Notified That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By Limitation By 581 Days. In Order To Explain The Reasons For The Impugned Delay, The Ld.Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Cit(A)/Nfac Order Was Passed Against The Assessee On 22.11.2021. However, Due To Covid-19 Pandemic Limitation For Filing Appeal Before The Court Of Law Was Extended Till February, 2022. Therefore, After Expiry Of The Limitation For Filing Of The Appeal On Feb., 2022, The Assessee Was Required To File Appeal Within 60 Days Of The Same I.E. By April, 2022. But The Assessee Could File The Appeal On

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.DR
Section 250

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 22.11.2021 pertaining to Asst.Year 2017-18. 2. The Registry has notified that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 581 days. In order to explain the reasons for the impugned delay, the ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the CIT(A)/NFAC order was passed against the assessee

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

ITA 1977/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

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

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

2] The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi due to oversight has confirmed the date of filing of appeal as 18.11.2020 instead of actual filing of appeal on 18.01.2020 and confirmed that the appeal was filed after a period of 314 days of delay for which no reason sought by the appellant for condonation of delay which is illegal

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 357/AHD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri Pancham Sethi, ARFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 80Section 80JSection 80L

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act though the same has not been claimed by the assessee in return of income. It is settled law that correct income of the assessee is to be assessed as per provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 in spite of higher income incorrectly declared by the assessee in the return of income. This view

SINHUJ DUDH UTPADAK SAH MAN LIMITED,KHEDA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, NADIAD

The appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2561/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Smt. Urvashi Mandhan, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 69ASection 80P

Section 80P of the Act, it was only the profit element embedded in the receipt of the assessee, that was liable to tax. He contended that on account of non- condonation of the delay grave prejudice had been caused to the assessee resulting in its entire receipts being subjected to tax that too without being heard and being a small

THE ANKLAV MERCANTILE CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,ANAND vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA

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

ITA 685/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Preyashi Tated, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 249(2)Section 68Section 69Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessment order under section 144 read with section 144B was served upon the assessee on 16.03.2024, and as per law, the appeal was required to be filed within 30 days, i.e., by 15.04.2024. However, the appeal was filed much later on 13.12.2024. In Form 35, the assessee admitted the delay and sought

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

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1820/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 May 2025AY 2020-21

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

For Respondent: Shri Durga Dutt, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 40A(7)Section 68Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

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 of Rs.15.14 crore were deposits and interest i. payable to members, part of the regular business

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

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 2025/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.R
Section 80I

2. It is humbly prayed to set aside the order of the Ld CIT(A) and direct the AO to re-examine the issue. 3. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground, which may be necessary.” Application for Condonation of Delay: 3. At the outset, we observe that the appeal

THE KANKREJ TALUKA SHIHORI CO. OP. PURCHASE & SALE UNION LTD.,BANASKANTHA vs. THE DY.CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

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

ITA 803/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(e)

section 80P of the Act. The assessee provided the copy of Supreme Court decision in case of Malviya Service Co-operative Ltd. as mentioned in para 3.1 of the assessment order. The Assessing Officer made disallowance u/s. 80P(2)(d) amounting to Rs. 46,780/-. The Assessing Officer also made disallowance u/s. 80P(2)(e) amounting