BARODA DISTRICT COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS UNION LIMITED,VADODARA, GUJARAT vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE 1(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for Asst

disallowance under Section 14A was deleted entirely, following ITAT precedent.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "80P(2)(d)", "80P(2)(a)(iv)", "14A", "8D" ], "issues

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)

2,93,286/-“ 3. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT-A erred in confirming the order of the AO by sustaining the disallowance of the deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80P

DHANLAXMI CREDIT CO. OP. SOCIETY LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO, WARD-2, PATAN

In the result, Ground Number 3 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. However, since the ground 2 has been disallowed against the assessee on merits

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

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:

Sections 80P(2)(d) and 80P(2)(c) of the Act and the treatment of a government grant as revenue income. 6.1. Ground numbers 1,2,3 and 5 deal with deduction u/s 80P of the Act. The main contention in this set of grounds pertain to the disallowance

UNION BANK CO.OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1228 & 1229/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Respectively Union Bank Co-Op. Credit The Dy.Cit बनाम/ Society Ltd. Circle-1(1)(1) V/S. 1, Dhalaxmi Market Ahmedabad Revadi Bazar Kalupur Ahmedabad – 380 001 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Aaau 0802 F (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anil Kshatriya, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Bhavna Gupta Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

disallowed the deductions claimed by the assessee under sections 80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(d) of the Act, adding

UNION BANK CO. OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1228 & 1229/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Respectively Union Bank Co-Op. Credit The Dy.Cit बनाम/ Society Ltd. Circle-1(1)(1) V/S. 1, Dhalaxmi Market Ahmedabad Revadi Bazar Kalupur Ahmedabad – 380 001 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Aaau 0802 F (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anil Kshatriya, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Bhavna Gupta Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

disallowed the deductions claimed by the assessee under sections 80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(d) of the Act, adding

THE BAVLA GROUP SEVA SAHAKAR MANDALI LTD,BAVLA, AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 3(2)(5), AHMEDABAD, AMBAWADI, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowance of claim the deduction of Rs. 4,01,607/- under section 80P of the Act and therefore you Honors are requested to direct the Ld. AO to allow full deductions under section 80P of the Act. 2

THE LADOL VIVTH KARYAKARI SAHKARI MANDLI LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE, PATAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 525 To 527/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21)

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). The assessee is a cooperative credit society engaged in providing credit facility to its members. It had claimed deduction of Rs.1,95,850/- in respect of interest received from Bank of Baroda (on FDR) u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, which was disallowed

THE LADOL VIVTH KARYAKARI SAHKARI MANDLI LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE, PATAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 525 To 527/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21)

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). The assessee is a cooperative credit society engaged in providing credit facility to its members. It had claimed deduction of Rs.1,95,850/- in respect of interest received from Bank of Baroda (on FDR) u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, which was disallowed

THE LADOL VIVTH KARYAKARI SAHKARI MANDLI LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE, PATAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 525 To 527/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21)

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). The assessee is a cooperative credit society engaged in providing credit facility to its members. It had claimed deduction of Rs.1,95,850/- in respect of interest received from Bank of Baroda (on FDR) u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, which was disallowed

NAVJIVAN (KALYAN) CO.OP. HOS. SCO. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.B.R.R. Kumarms. Suchitra Kamble

section 80P(2) (f) instead of 80P(2)(d) of the I.T. Act, without considering facts of the case. 2. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance

SOHAMNAGAR CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY VIBHAG-III,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowance of the deduction u/s 80P of Rs. 2,80,904/-. 3.1 Without prejudice to above and in the alternative, the ld. AO has failed to appreciate that real income arising from the receipts and expenses of the society was chargeable to tax.” 3. The issue for consideration before us is whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section

THE SANKHEDA JETPUR PAVI TALUKA GINNING PRESSING COTTON SALE CO.OP SOCIETY LTD,VADODARA vs. THE PR. CIT-3, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 80P(2)(a)(v) are disallowed, they should be granted deductions under Section 80P(2)(e). For this issue

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. THE GUJARAT STATE CO. OP. HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LTD, AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

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

disallowing the interest income earned by the assessee by way of FD investment in other Co-op. Society, i.e. Gujarat State Co-op. Bank Ltd. (GSCB) and the rental income from HUDCO and SHARK Systems, which were claimed by the assessee u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. THE GUJARAT STATE CO. OP. HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LTD, AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

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

disallowing the interest income earned by the assessee by way of FD investment in other Co-op. Society, i.e. Gujarat State Co-op. Bank Ltd. (GSCB) and the rental income from HUDCO and SHARK Systems, which were claimed by the assessee u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. THE GUJARAT STATE CO. OP. HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LTD, AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

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

disallowing the interest income earned by the assessee by way of FD investment in other Co-op. Society, i.e. Gujarat State Co-op. Bank Ltd. (GSCB) and the rental income from HUDCO and SHARK Systems, which were claimed by the assessee u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before

RATNESHWARI CO.OP.CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT., PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. 2. The Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:- “1.1 The order passed by U/s.250 passed on 24-05-2024 by NFAC [CIT(A)], Delhi (for short "CIT(A)" upholding the disallowance of deduction u/s 80P

SHREE SARVODAYA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,VADODARA vs. NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURISDICTION THE DY. CIT, CICLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowing the interest income earned by the assessee by way of FD investment in other Co-op. Society, i.e. Gujarat State Co-op. Bank Ltd. (GSCB) and the rental income from HUDCO and SHARK Systems, which were claimed by the assessee u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before