THE DHAMAI COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURE SERVICE SOCIETY LIMITED,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , HOSHIARPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and the order(s) of the Kerala High Court and other authorities to the contrary are set aside

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.273/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

disallowance of deduction of Rs.36,92,758/- u/s 80P of the Act is confirmed.” 7. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in record. The ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the issue on merit. But the issue is well settled before the bench. Here, we respectfully relied on the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court

M/S. SATIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUKTSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

56). It has further been held that the Carbon Credits are on the account of savings of energy consumption and not on business. Even while rendering this judgment, the Jaipur Tribunal has discussed the provisions of 115BBG and, thus, since as on the day also, RECs/ESCs are not part of Section 2(24) and, hence, it is a capital receipt

THE DALLA CO OP AGRI MULTIPURPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-, PHAGWARA

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 593/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Dalla Co-Op. Agri Vs. Ito, Ward (1), Multipurpose Society Ltd. C/O Phagwara. B.D. Bansal & Co. B-641, Ground Floor Near A Block Gurudwara Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar. [Pan:-Aacat2201M] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Lakshay Bansal, Ca Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23.03.2026

2) (d) of the Act, ( as per details contained in para 3 of the assessment order) and the said claim of the assessee, has been disallowed by the AO due to the reasons that cooperative banks do not fall under the purview of cooperative society and are now governed by Banking Regulation Act, hence interest income arising from funds invested

M/S. SHREE-E-KASHMIR COLLEGE OF EDUCATIONAL,JAMMU vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, JAMMU

In the result, the captioned four appeals of the Assessee Trust are allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

disallowed interest to the tune of Rs. 1,96,496/- which should have been allowed as claimed. The brief history of the case is as under:- 1. The assessee is a unit of Pir Panchal Education Trust. The Trust has established a college for bachelor of education. The said college is duly recognized by the University of Jammu. All admissions

M/S. SHREE-E-KASHMIR COLLEGE OF EDUCATIONAL,JAMMU vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, JAMMU

In the result, the captioned four appeals of the Assessee Trust are allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

disallowed interest to the tune of Rs. 1,96,496/- which should have been allowed as claimed. The brief history of the case is as under:- 1. The assessee is a unit of Pir Panchal Education Trust. The Trust has established a college for bachelor of education. The said college is duly recognized by the University of Jammu. All admissions

M/S. SHREE-E-KASHMIR COLLEGE OF EDUCATIONAL,JAMMU vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, JAMMU

In the result, the captioned four appeals of the Assessee Trust are allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

disallowed interest to the tune of Rs. 1,96,496/- which should have been allowed as claimed. The brief history of the case is as under:- 1. The assessee is a unit of Pir Panchal Education Trust. The Trust has established a college for bachelor of education. The said college is duly recognized by the University of Jammu. All admissions

M/S. SHREE-E-KASHMIR COLLEGE OF EDUCATIONAL,JAMMU vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, JAMMU

In the result, the captioned four appeals of the Assessee Trust are allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

disallowed interest to the tune of Rs. 1,96,496/- which should have been allowed as claimed. The brief history of the case is as under:- 1. The assessee is a unit of Pir Panchal Education Trust. The Trust has established a college for bachelor of education. The said college is duly recognized by the University of Jammu. All admissions

THE JASSOMAZARA COOP MULTIPUPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED,NAWANSHAHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the four appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 513 To 516/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21

disallowed the claim u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act 61, and has assessed the interest portion received from bank amounting to Rs. 42.47 lakhs, under the head Income from other sources u/s 56 of the Act 61. 9. The matter was carried in appeal before the first appellate authority and the Ld. CIT ( A ) NFAC, has also considered

THE JASSOMAZARA COOP MULTIPUPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED,NAWANSHAHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the four appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 513 To 516/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21

disallowed the claim u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act 61, and has assessed the interest portion received from bank amounting to Rs. 42.47 lakhs, under the head Income from other sources u/s 56 of the Act 61. 9. The matter was carried in appeal before the first appellate authority and the Ld. CIT ( A ) NFAC, has also considered

THE JASSOMAZARA COOP MULTIPUPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED,NAWANSHAHR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the four appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 513 To 516/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21

disallowed the claim u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act 61, and has assessed the interest portion received from bank amounting to Rs. 42.47 lakhs, under the head Income from other sources u/s 56 of the Act 61. 9. The matter was carried in appeal before the first appellate authority and the Ld. CIT ( A ) NFAC, has also considered

THE JASSOMAZARA COOP MULTIPUPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED,NAWANSAHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the four appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 513 To 516/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21

disallowed the claim u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act 61, and has assessed the interest portion received from bank amounting to Rs. 42.47 lakhs, under the head Income from other sources u/s 56 of the Act 61. 9. The matter was carried in appeal before the first appellate authority and the Ld. CIT ( A ) NFAC, has also considered

THE BAGHAPURANA & CO OPERATIVE MARKETING SOCIETY LTD,MOGA vs. INCOME TAX OFEIER-2, MOGA

In the result, ground nos

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

56 of the Act and disallow the exemption claimed u/s. 80P(2) claimed by the assessee treating its income under the head “Business and Profession”. The considering fact, the assessee added back the interest 2,73,342/- on account of income from other sources by invoking section

M/S ROYAL FURNISHERS,JAMMU vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD - 2 (2), JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

56,87,990/- on account of disallowance of an amount of Rs. 6,39,490/- towards contribution to ESI and Provident Fund. 3 Royal Furnishers v. AO 4. In appeal, the ld. CIT(A) has observed that there are conflicting decisions on the issue of amendment brought in the Finance Act 2021 in section

MEASEG G.H AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

56,950/- upheld by the Sir, it is submitted that the disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Worthy CIT(A) impugned addition made purely Act on the basis of books of accounts and during the year under consideration assessee company has not made any cash purchases from the parties mentioned in the impugned order, copy of ledger account was also

MEASAGE SAT KARTAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

56,950/- upheld by the Sir, it is submitted that the disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Worthy CIT(A) impugned addition made purely Act on the basis of books of accounts and during the year under consideration assessee company has not made any cash purchases from the parties mentioned in the impugned order, copy of ledger account was also

MEASAGE SAT KARTAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

56,950/- upheld by the Sir, it is submitted that the disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Worthy CIT(A) impugned addition made purely Act on the basis of books of accounts and during the year under consideration assessee company has not made any cash purchases from the parties mentioned in the impugned order, copy of ledger account was also

MEASAGE SAT KARTAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

56,950/- upheld by the Sir, it is submitted that the disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Worthy CIT(A) impugned addition made purely Act on the basis of books of accounts and during the year under consideration assessee company has not made any cash purchases from the parties mentioned in the impugned order, copy of ledger account was also

MEASAGE G. H AGRO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

56,950/- upheld by the Sir, it is submitted that the disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Worthy CIT(A) impugned addition made purely Act on the basis of books of accounts and during the year under consideration assessee company has not made any cash purchases from the parties mentioned in the impugned order, copy of ledger account was also