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.

8 results for “house property”+ Section 80P(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai93Bangalore35Delhi35Jaipur19Hyderabad16Kolkata13Chennai11Cochin11Indore10Pune9Ahmedabad8Chandigarh7Surat6Telangana5Nagpur4Visakhapatnam3Kerala3Rajkot3Varanasi3Karnataka2Cuttack2SC2Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 80P(2)(a)18Section 5710Addition to Income8Deduction7Section 80P(2)(d)6Section 115Section 564Section 12A3Section 143(2)3

SHRI VAJAPUR PATIDAR CO. OPARATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO, WARD-5, PATAN

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 27/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddharatha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 27/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2017-2018 Shri Vajapur Patidar Co. Operative Credit I.T.O., Society Limited, Vs. Ward-5, At. Vijapaur Po. Sanghpur, Patan. Ta. Vijapaur, Dist. Mehsana

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Agarwal, Sr.D.R
Section 80P(2)(d)

4), the investment in such co-operative bank [ bearing the legal trappings of a co-op society ] by a co-op society as envisaged in Section 80P(1) of the Act is not divested of such benefit. A.Y. 2017-18 8 9.7 Joining the issue in hand, as per Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act, the only requirement

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

Section 80P3
Disallowance3
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)

Housing Society Ltd. reported in 81 Taxman 257 (Bom.) has held as under: “Letting out of the shops of the assessee-society to persons other than its members did not fall as an activity of the assessee-society either in clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 80P. It was an activity of the assessee-society

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)

Housing Society Ltd. reported in 81 Taxman 257 (Bom.) has held as under: “Letting out of the shops of the assessee-society to persons other than its members did not fall as an activity of the assessee-society either in clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 80P. It was an activity of the assessee-society

JAVED ABDULSAMED KURESHI,,BANASKANTHA vs. ITO, WARD-2, , PALANPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2549/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 224/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2015-16 Dholasan Dudh Utpadak Sahkari Mandli I.T.O., Ltd., Vs. Ward-1, At & Po Dholasan, Mehsana. Tal. & Dist., Mehsana-382732. Pan: Bpkpp9036F

For Appellant: Shri M.M. Salvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 80P

4 administrative expenses. The assessee is engaged in multiple activity and some of the activity are eligible for deduction under section 80P of the Act. At the same time some of the activity of the assessee are taxable. But the assessee is maintaining common books of accounts, common infrastructure, common facilities, manpower etc. Thus in such a situation, the only

DHOLASAN DUDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD,MEHSANA vs. ITO, WARD-1, MEHSANA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 224/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 224/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2015-16 Dholasan Dudh Utpadak Sahkari Mandli I.T.O., Ltd., Vs. Ward-1, At & Po Dholasan, Mehsana. Tal. & Dist., Mehsana-382732. Pan: Bpkpp9036F

For Appellant: Shri M.M. Salvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 80P

4 administrative expenses. The assessee is engaged in multiple activity and some of the activity are eligible for deduction under section 80P of the Act. At the same time some of the activity of the assessee are taxable. But the assessee is maintaining common books of accounts, common infrastructure, common facilities, manpower etc. Thus in such a situation, the only

THE VENUS PARKLAND CO.OPERATGIVE HOUSING SERVICE SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(3)(5),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1039/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 56Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(c)

section 80P(2) (c) (ii) of the Act which the Ld. A.O. has not allowed and for this purpose, assessee referred to the Ground No. 3 under which said relief is sought. Ld. Counsel by referring to Page 7 of Paper Book contended that the basic purpose of assessee co-op society is to maintain the property of the members

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)

property. The transfer fee TDR Premium charged by the society from its member is a commercial transaction and not eligible for exemption on grant of mutuality. In view of the above, the ground is rejected.” 11. Before us, on the strength of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court’s decision in the case of Manekbaug Co-operative Housing Society

NAUTILUS PREMISE OWNERS ASSOCIATION,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

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

ITA 2146/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Manish J Shah & Shri Rushin Patel, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 56Section 57

4– 5. Swimming pool maintenance 6. Repairs and pest control 2. These expenses are clearly related to the general upkeep of the residential complex. They ensure the smooth functioning and maintenance of the property for the benefit of the members. However, these are operational costs that bear no direct relation to the generation of interest income from fixed deposits