THE KARAMSAD NAGRIK CO. OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,,ANAND vs. THE DCIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1195/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-14 The Karamsad Nagrik Co-Op. Credit D.C.I.T. Society Ltd., Vs. Anand Circle, Nr. Bus Stand, Anand. At & Post Karamsad, Karamsad.

penalty provisions under section 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be attracted. A.Y. 2013-14 5 6.1 Moving further, there is an explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) of the Act which provides deemed concealment of income. Under the explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) of the Act, there are 2 situations. In situation

SHRE VAISHNAV PARIVAR SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(1),, VADODARA

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

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act).” In this case, return of income declaring income of Rs. nil was filed on 13th 3. August, 2013. Subsequently, the case was selected under scrutiny by issuing of notice u/s. 143(2) on 2nd September, 2001. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessing officer noticed

I.M.A. VADODARA CO.-OP. CREDIT SOC. LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(2),, VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act).” All these grounds of appeal are interconnected therefore they are adjudicated together. 4. In this case, return of income declaring income of Rs. nil was filed on 7th December, 2013. Subsequently, the case was selected under scrutiny by issuing of notice u/s

SHRI SAHAJANAND CO. OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(2),, VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act).” All these grounds of appeal are interconnected therefore they are adjudicated together. 4. In this case, return of income declaring income of Rs. nil was filed on 7th December, 2013. Subsequently, the case was selected under scrutiny by issuing of notice u/s

SHRI FRIENDS CO. OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(2),, VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act).” All these grounds of appeal are interconnected therefore they are adjudicated together. 4. In this case, return of income declaring income of Rs. nil was filed on 7th December, 2013. Subsequently, the case was selected under scrutiny by issuing of notice u/s

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

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.

u/s 250 4. For the lead year, i.e. A.Y. 2013–14, the assessee filed its return of income on 16.09.2013 declaring total income at Nil. Subsequently, revised returns were filed on 31.03.2014 and 31.03.2015, each time declaring Nil income. The return was initially processed under section 143(1). The case was selected for scrutiny. Notice under section 143(2) dated

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

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.

u/s 250 4. For the lead year, i.e. A.Y. 2013–14, the assessee filed its return of income on 16.09.2013 declaring total income at Nil. Subsequently, revised returns were filed on 31.03.2014 and 31.03.2015, each time declaring Nil income. The return was initially processed under section 143(1). The case was selected for scrutiny. Notice under section 143(2) dated

THE ACIT, PATAN CIRCLE, PATAN vs. THE SARDAR PATEL CO OPERTAIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. (Addition of Rs. 1,46,98,641/-) 4. In appeal, Ld. CIT(A) accepted the assessee’s contention and allowed deduction under section 80P

RAILWAYMENS CO. OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1)(3),, VADODARA

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

1), Baroda ["the AO"] in not allowing the deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of Rs. 41,35,350/-claimed by the appellant. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of the AO holding that the interest earned by the appellant from deposits made with nationalized banks is assessable u/s

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

1,06,410/- 3. The learned Pr. CIT has erred in law and in facts in rejecting the claim of the appellant u/s 80P with respect to Interest Income earned from various nationalized and scheduled banks and government companies to the tune of Rs. 50,37,428/-. 4. CIT has erred in law and in facts in rejecting the claim

SHRI SAHAJANAND CO. OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-3(1),, VADODARA

In the result, appeal field by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) (Through Virtual Court)

1) Baroda [“the AO’’] in not allowing the deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of Rs. 58,10,410/- claimed by the appellant. 2.The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of the AO holding that the interest earned by the appellant from deposits made with nationalized banks is assessable u/s

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

penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act is unjustified. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal. 4. The assessee is a co-operative credit society. For the year under consideration

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

penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act is unjustified. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal. 4. The assessee is a co-operative credit society. For the year under consideration

MALATAJ CO. OP. CREDIT SOCIETY. LTD.,ANAND vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(1),, PETLAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 by the learned Assessing Officer. ------ 3. Your Appellant prays to reserve the right to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal. Total Tax Effect 2,00,450/-“ 3. The brief facts of the case are that return of income declaring taxable income at Rs.Nil filed

THE JINDVA SEVA SAHAKARI MANDLI LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalthe Jindva Seva Sahakari The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Mandli Limited, Ward-1, At & Post-Jindva, Gandhinagar. Ta. Dehgam, District, Gandhinagar-382315. [Pan :Aabat5907 F] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

u/s 80P(2)(d) of Rs. 12,06,965/-may please be allowed and the assessed Income of Rs.22.62,331/- require to be deleted. 04. That the Ld. A.O has wrongly mentioned the Income as per 143(3) of Rs 10,55,366/- which facts are wrong and therefore it require to be deleted. 05. That the appellant