BALASINOR ROAD TRANSPORT CO. OP. SOCIETY LTD.,,MAHISAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, LUNAWADA

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddharatha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 39-40/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2014-2015 & 2015-2016) Balasinor Road Transport Co-Op. Income Tax Officer, Society Ltd., Vs. Lunawada. Rajpuri Gate, Balasinor, Dist. Mahisagar-388255. Pan: Aaaab5121G

24) (viia) of the Act by Finance Act, 2006 and such principles thus no longer serve as strict guiding principle to test the relief eligible under S. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Therefore, the plea raised on behalf of the Revenue towards absence of principle of mutuality in such deposits with co-operative banks is a damp squib. Thus

THE BANAS DAIRY EMPLOYEES CREDIT & SUPPLY CONSUMERS CO.,OP. SOCIETY LTD.,,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ACIT,B.K.CIRCLE,, PALANPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddharatha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2017-2018 Banas Dairy Employees Credit & Supply A.C.I.T., Consumers Co-Op. Society Limited, Vs. B.K. Circle, Banas Dairy, Palanpur. Palanpur, Banaskantha-385001. Pan: Aaaab0631R

disallowance of the deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act with respect to the interest income from the Nationalized banks/co-operative banks. 4. The facts in brief are that the assessee in the present case is a co-operative society and engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to its members. The assessee

MEHSANA TALUKA MADHYAMIK TEACHERS CREDIT & CONSUMERS SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO, WARD-2, PRESENT WARD-1, MEHSANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Ms. Madhumita Roy (Judicial Member)

disallowance of the deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act with respect to the interest income from the co- operative banks. 4. The facts in brief are that the assessee in the present case is a co-operative society and engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to its members. The assessee

SHREE UTKARSH CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, PATAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddharatha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 315/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2017-2018 Shree Utkarsh Co-Op Credit Society I.T.O., Limited, Vs. Ward-4, Nani Shop No.35, Patan. Gate No.2, Unjha, Mehasana-384170. Pan: Aalas9670G

disallowance of the deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act with respect to the interest income from the co-operative banks. 5. The facts in brief are that the assessee in the present case is a co-operative society and engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to its members. The assessee

THE UTTAR GUJARAT UMA CO.OP.CREDIT SOC. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(1)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1670 & 1671/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16)

24) (viia) of the Act by Finance Act, 2006 and such principles thus no longer serve as strict guiding principle to test the relief eligible under S. 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Therefore, the plea raised on behalf of the Revenue towards absence of principle of mutuality in such deposits with co-operative banks is a damp squib. Thus

INDUSTRIAL CO. OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,,KHEDA vs. THE PR. CIT-2,, VADODARA

In the result, the tax appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1064/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Industrial Co-Operative Credit Vs. The Pr.Cit-2 Society Ltd. Vadodara. At-Kanjari, Anand-Nadiad Road Ta. : Nadiad, Dist: Kheda Pan : Aaaai 7424 B

disallowed by the AO in his assessment order passed under section 143(3) on 10.2.2015. The issue was further agitated by the assessee before the ld.first appellate authority, who, however, allowed claim of the assessee vide order dated 28.12.2015. This appellate order was not challenged by the Revenue before any higher authority. Rather, the ld.Pr.CIT invoked his revisionary power under

THE MEHSANA URBAN CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE , MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

2. The reopening of assessment is bad in law and required to be quashed.” 5. Referring to the contents of the above application ld.counsel for the assessee sought admission of the additional ground pointing out that it was a legal ground which could be adjudicated on the basis of material and facts on record. That therefore, as per the decision

THE MEHSANA URBAN CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE , MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

2. The reopening of assessment is bad in law and required to be quashed.” 5. Referring to the contents of the above application ld.counsel for the assessee sought admission of the additional ground pointing out that it was a legal ground which could be adjudicated on the basis of material and facts on record. That therefore, as per the decision

THE MEHSANA URBAN CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE , MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

2. The reopening of assessment is bad in law and required to be quashed.” 5. Referring to the contents of the above application ld.counsel for the assessee sought admission of the additional ground pointing out that it was a legal ground which could be adjudicated on the basis of material and facts on record. That therefore, as per the decision

M/S.HDB FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-1 , AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

viia) of Rs. 57,79,00,453/-. Bad debt - Rs. 2,24,81,43,124/- In this regards the assessee company submits before your goodself that during the year under consideration, the assessee has written off Bad Debt amounting to Rs. 2,24,81,43,124/- which is net of bad debt recovered during the year. It is humbly submitted

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1 NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedsl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 311/Ahd/2016 2010-11 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 2. 2176/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 3. 2173/Ahd/2016 2011-12 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 4. 165/Ahd/2017 2012-13 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 5. 287/Ahd/2017 2012-13 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 6-7 520 & 2013-14 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., 521/Ahd/2018 & Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 8-9 604 & 605/ 2013-14 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Ahd/2018 & Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K

24. On the other hand, the learned DR opposed to admit the additional ground of appeal on the reasoning that it was not raised before the authorities below. 25. We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Limited vs. CIT, cited supra

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, RACE COURSE CIRCLE, VADODARA vs. THE BHARUCH DIST. CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LIMITED, BHARUCH

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowance of deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) of the Act, without appreciating the fact that appropriation from profit at 15% as statutory bad and doubtful debts Reserve was not part of Bad and doubtful debts in the books of accounts? 2. Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(Appeals) is justified

INTAS BIOPHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 865/Ahd/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Intas The Dy. Commissioner Of बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Biopharmaceuticals Ltd. Income Tax Vs. Plot 423/P/A, Sarkhej Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad Bavla Highway, Moraiya, Sanand, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 382213 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabci4722M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Bandish Soparkar & Shri Parin अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shah, Ars. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit. Dr & Shri Ashish Rajesh Revar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/08/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 20.01.2016 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. Ita No. 865/Ahd/2016 [Intas Biopharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Dcit] A.Y. 2011-12 - 2 –

viia) of the Act, which is applicable to banking companies, financial institutions, non-banking financial company etc. and the said provision is not applicable in the case of present assessee. Therefore, we have to examine the claim for deduction of the assessee in accordance with the provision of Section 36(1)(vii) of the Act. ITA No. 865/Ahd/2016 [Intas Biopharmaceuticals

GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

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)

section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8.0 The appellant craves leave to add to, alter, delete or modify any of the grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal. Ground No. 1: Disallowance of guarantee fees paid to Govt. of Gujarat of Rs. 7.19 crores. This guarantee fees paid

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BARODA vs. GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,, BARODA

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)

section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8.0 The appellant craves leave to add to, alter, delete or modify any of the grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal. Ground No. 1: Disallowance of guarantee fees paid to Govt. of Gujarat of Rs. 7.19 crores. This guarantee fees paid

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. THE KALUPUR COMMERCIAL CO. OP. BANK LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and all Tax Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

disallow and add back an amount of interest accrued on NPA, it should be Rs. 41,18,29,397 only and not as propose in the notice. Regarding Non-applicability of Provisions of Section 43D & non considering interest accrued on NPA account as income, your assessee respectfully submits as under. 1. Your Assessee is a schedule Bank and Provisions