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.

133 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 80P(2)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Pune255Mumbai194Chennai169Bangalore133Cochin132Panaji83Hyderabad40Ahmedabad38Kolkata29Jaipur26Nagpur25Visakhapatnam24Lucknow18Delhi15Rajkot14Surat12Chandigarh12Indore11Raipur10Karnataka5Patna4Jabalpur2Amritsar1Guwahati1SC1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 80P191Section 80P(2)(a)128Deduction83Section 80P(2)(d)74Section 26354Condonation of Delay53Disallowance45Section 25040Section 143(3)

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BENGALURU, BANGALORE vs. M/S. BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED , BANGALORE

ITA 2348/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 250

delay is condoned; and the Appeals & the Cos for both the Asst. years are admitted for adjudication. 7. Further, the assessee has filed additional ground in the grounds of cross objection as ground no.8. During the course of the ITA Nos.2347 & 2348/Bang/2024 & CO Nos.4 & 5/Bang/2025 M/s. Bangalore Credit Co-operative Society Ltd., Bangalore Page 11 of 44 proceedings before

M/S. KAJEKAR SEVA SHAKARI BANK ,BANTWAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1) , MANGALORE

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

ITA 255/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 133 · Page 1 of 7

34
Section 15432
Section 143(1)31
Addition to Income30
ITAT Bangalore
10 May 2024
AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Kajekar Seva Sahakari Bank, Vs. Ito, Pandavarakallu, B Kajekar, Ward –2(1), Bantal – 574 233, Karnataka. Mangalore. Pan : Aaaak 2473 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. V. Srinivasan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Satish Meriga, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.05.2024

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Satish Meriga, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2018-19. 2. There is a delay of 38 days in filing this appeal. Assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay accompanied by an affidavit stating therein the reasons for late filing of this appeal. We have perused the reasons stated

M/S. PRATHAMIKA KRUSHI PATTINA SAHAKARA NIYAMITA,HOSAPETE vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KALABURGI

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

ITA 1724/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Siva Prasad Reddy, ITPFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

D E R Per George George K, JM: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT’s order dated 13.03.2019 passed u/s 263 of the I.T.Act. The relevant assessment year is 2014-2015. 2. There is a delay of 73 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation

M/S. PRATHAMIKA KRUSHI PATTINA SAHAKARA NIYAMITA,HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KALABURGI

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

ITA 1725/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Siva Prasad Reddy, ITPFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 3Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

D E R Per George George K, JM: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT’s order dated 30.03.2019 passed u/s 263 of the I.T.Act. The relevant assessment year is 2014-2015. 2. There is a delay of 73 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation

M/S. MANJUNATHESHWARA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 6(2)(2), BENGALURU

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

ITA 2238/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Chaitanya V. Mudrabettu, CAFor Respondent: Sri.K.Sankar Ganesh, JCIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

condone the delay in filing this appeal and proceed to dispose of this appeal on merits. 3. The grounds raised read as follows:- “1. The appellant denies himself liable to be taxed on disallowance of Rs.6,89,167/- as assessed by the learned CIT(A) as against the return income of Rs. NIL under the facts 2 ITA No.2238/Bang/2019. M/s.Manjunatheshwara

INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), TIPTUR vs. SRIUDAYARAVI CREDIT CO-OP, TIPTUR

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2095/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Harsha J, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 2(24)(viia)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 6. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income and claimed deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices were issued to the assessee. From the documents filed, it was noticed that the assessee

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. M/S. BANGALORE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, BENGALURU

ITA 2347/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Respondent: Sri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.R
Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

section 80P(2)(d) of the Ach Additional Ground 8. Without prejudice to the above grounds, that the learned lower authorities ought to have held that the interest of Rs.1,00,80,256/- from investment made in Sri Guru Raghavendra Sahakara Bank cannot be said to be accrued and therefore, cannot be treated as income. Each of the above grounds

M/S. THE BHAVASARA KSHATRIYA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,MYSURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), MYSURU

ITA 981/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Ms. Madhumita Roym/S Bhavasara Kshatriya Co- Operative Society Ltd., 279, Benkinawab Street, Mandi Mohalla, Mysureu-570 001. Pan – Aadat 2458 F Appelant Assessee By : Shri V Srinivasan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel For Dept. Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept
Section 143Section 234Section 250Section 80P

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 8. On merit, the ld.AR submitted that the assessee has claimed deduction, which is as follows:- 1) Under Section 80P(2)(a) Rs.14,76,803 2) Under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) - Rs.13,98,572/- Total Rs.28,75,375/- 9. The ld.AO denied the above exemption claimed by the assessee

SREESHARADA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,UDUPI vs. ITO WARD- 1&TPS , UDUPI

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1316/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 80

delay condoned and appeals admitted. Page 10 of 19 12. Briefly stated the facts for assessment year 2018 – 19 shows that assessee filed its return of income at Rs. Nil on 26 September 2018. The return was picked up for limited scrutiny assessment for verification of deduction from total income under chapter VI – A. Notice under section 143 (2

SREESHARADA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,UDUPI vs. ITO WARD- 1&TPS , UDUPI

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1315/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 80

delay condoned and appeals admitted. Page 10 of 19 12. Briefly stated the facts for assessment year 2018 – 19 shows that assessee filed its return of income at Rs. Nil on 26 September 2018. The return was picked up for limited scrutiny assessment for verification of deduction from total income under chapter VI – A. Notice under section 143 (2

JAMMANAHALLY PRATHAMIKA KRISHI PATTINA SAHAKARA SANGHA,BALLUPET vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, HASSAN

In the result ITA No. 192/Bangalore/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 341/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 80

D E R 1. ITA No.192/Bang/2025 is filed by Jammanahally Prathamika Krishi Pattina Sahakara Sangha (the assessee/appellant) for the assessment year 2017-18 against the appellate order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) [ld. CIT(A)] dated 5.1.2024 wherein the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Page 2

JAMMANAHALLY PRATHAMIKA KRISHI PATTINA SAHAKARA SANGHA,SAKLESHPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2, HASSAN

In the result ITA No. 192/Bangalore/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 192/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 80

D E R 1. ITA No.192/Bang/2025 is filed by Jammanahally Prathamika Krishi Pattina Sahakara Sangha (the assessee/appellant) for the assessment year 2017-18 against the appellate order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) [ld. CIT(A)] dated 5.1.2024 wherein the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Page 2

M/S. KACHUR CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD ,KACHUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), MANGALORE

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

ITA 478/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Kachur Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd., Vs. Ito, 15-20-1227/6, Ward - 2(2), Lower Ground Floor, Mangalore. Essel Wilcon Below Radha Medicals, Bendorewell, Kankanady, Mangalore – 575 002. Pan : Aaatk 8754 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Kashinath Kalamath, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel For Revenue. Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Kashinath Kalamath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

condone the delay and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. Page 2 of 6 3. The solitary issue that is raised is whether CIT(A) is justified in confirming the disallowance of claim under section 80P(2)(a)(i) / 80P(2)(d

INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TIPTUR vs. SRI UDAYRAVI CREDIT CO-OP, TIPTUR

ITA 2094/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Harsha J, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 2(24)(viia)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 6. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income and claimed deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices were issued to the assessee. From the documents filed, it was noticed that the assessee

PRATHAMIKA KRUSHI PATHINA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA NELAJI ,KODAGU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MADIKERI

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

ITA 1865/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2021-22 M/S. Prathamika Krushi Pathina Sahakara Vs. Ito, Sangha Niyamitha Nelaji, Ward – 1, No.2776, Nelaji, Nelaji Madikeri, Madikeri. Kodagu – 571 214. Pan : Aagan 1004 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Lakshmi, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel For Department. Date Of Hearing : 24.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.10.2024

For Appellant: Ms. Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80(2)(d)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

D E R Per George George K, Vice President: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(A)’s order dated 15.07.2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2021-22. 2. There is a delay of 11 days in filing this appeal. Assessee

YADAGERE SOUHARDA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED., ,CHIKKAMAGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , CHIKKAMAGALURU

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

ITA 444/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Varun Bhat, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal is condoned. 4. The issues raised in the grounds of appeal are deduction of interest income received from banks u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) and considering the interest income as income from other sources u/s. 56 of the Act. 5. The brief facts of the case are that assessee filed its return

BANNANJE GRAHAKARA VIVIDHODDESHA SAHAKARA SANGHA LTD., ,UDUPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, & TPS, , UDUPI

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

ITA 79/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George Kshri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh R Uppin, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate – Standing
Section 5

condone the delay of 58 days in filing the present appeal. 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 21/09/2016 declaring gross total income of Rs.30,08,301/- and after claiming deduction u/s 80P(2), the total income was nil. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices were

M/S. RYTHARA SEVA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 6(2)(5), BANGALORE

ITA 226/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jul 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. Rythara Seva Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha, Hesaraghatta, Opp. Bmtc Bus Stop, Hesaraghatta Mainroad, Bangalore-560 088 ….Appellant Pan Aacar1587N Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2)(5), Bangalore. ……Respondent.

For Appellant: Shri Nayaz Pasha, C.A.&For Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

D E R PER SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM : The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Bangalore passed u/s. 143(3) and u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 2. At the time of hearing, The Ld. AR submitted that there is a delay of 42 days in filing

SRI VENUGOPALAKRISHNA CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(4), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1313/BANG/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2011-12 Sri Venugopalakrishna Credit Co-Operative Vs. Ito, Society, Ward – 5(2)(4), No.123/3, 9Th Cross, 2Nd Main Chamajpet, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 018. Pan :Aabas 6974 R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. H. Guruswamy, Itp Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel For Revenue. Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri. H. Guruswamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 148Section 250Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

80P(2)(d) in respect Page 2 of 8 of the Interest income on investment made with the Banks without providing the Incidental charges attributable to earning of such interest as per Section 57 of the Act. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.13,83,452/- based on certain Judicial decisions which are distinguishable

M/S THE KANGOD GROUP MULTI PURPOSE CO-OP SOCIETY ,SIRSI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , SIRSI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in A

ITA 2793/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abirama Karthikeyan, IRS (DR)
Section 234Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

section 80P(2)(d) of the Act, being income attributable to the business of the appellant, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. Without prejudice, the AO ought to have allowed the interest to the extent earned from Co-operative societies, as stated by the AO in the order of assessment, on the facts and circumstances