SURABHI SOUHARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(5), BENGALURU

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

reassess is not valid as the issue fell within Chapter VI-A. For deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i), the matter

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. CANARA BANK, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear: 2017-18

reassess under Section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under Section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April 2001. 9. From perusal of Section 14A of the Act, it is evident that for the purposes of computing

M/S. ING VYSYA BANK EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED PRESENTLY KNOWN AS M/S. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK EMPLOYEES CO-OPEATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2011-12

reassessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] dated 27.12.2018 was dismissed. Page 2 of 6 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. The orders of the authorities below in so far as they are against the appellant are opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts

KEDAMBADI MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE WOMEN SOCIETY LIMITED,KEDAMBADI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 PUTTUR, PUTTUR

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2019-20

2, Lucknow (the learned CIT – A) for assessment year 2019 – 20 on 18 December 2024 wherein the appeal filed by the assessee against the reassessment intimation passed u/s 154 of the Act where in in intimation order under section 143 (1) of the income tax act 1961 dated 27 June 2023 passed by the central processing Centre, assesseee sought rectification

CHIKKAMUDNOOR MILK PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, ,CHIKKAMUDNOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , PUTTUR

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2019-20

2, Lucknow (the learned CIT – A) for assessment year 2019 – 20 on 18 December 2024 wherein the appeal filed by the assessee against the reassessment intimation passed u/s 154 of the Act where in in intimation order under section 143 (1) of the income tax act 1961 dated 27 June 2023 passed by the central processing Centre, assesseee sought rectification

KANAKA CREDIT CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED ,CHITRADURGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, , DAVANGERE

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2014-15

section 80P(2) should be considered while granting deduction. 7. Considering the rival submissions we note that the assessee filed appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA) against the reassessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. CANARA BANK, BENGALURU

Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nITA No.210/Bang/2024\nAssessmentYear: 2017-18\nM/s Canara Bank\nFM wing, Head Office,\n112, J.C. Road\nBangalore 560002\nPAN NO: AAACC6106G\nVs.\nDCIT\nCircle-2(1)(1)\nBangalore\nAPPELLANT\nRESPONDENT\nITA No.222/Bang/2024\nAssessmentYear: 2017-18\nDCIT\nCircle-2(1)(1)\nBangalore\nVs.\nM/s Canara Bank\nFM wing, Head Office,\n112, J.C. Road\nBangalore 560 002\nAPPELLANT\nRESPONDENT\nITA No.1154/Bang/2023\nAssessme

reassess under Section 147 or pass an order\nenhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or\notherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under Section 154, for\nany assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April 2001.\n9. From perusal of Section 14A of the Act, it is evident that for the\npurposes of computing

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 TPS VIJAYAPUR , VIJAYAPUR vs. PRATHAMIK KRUSHI PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT SARWAD , SARWAD

In the result, all the 3 appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

reassessment order was passed wherein the addition of Rs.1,71,32,728/- was made to the total income of the assessee and further it was held that assessee is not entitled to deduction u/s. 80P of the Act. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the written submission was made by the assessee

ITO WARD 1 TPS VIJAYAPUR, VIJAYAPUR vs. PRATHAMIK KRUSHI PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT SARWAD , SARWAD

In the result, all the 3 appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

reassessment order was passed wherein the addition of Rs.1,71,32,728/- was made to the total income of the assessee and further it was held that assessee is not entitled to deduction u/s. 80P of the Act. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the written submission was made by the assessee

ITO WARD 1 TPS VIJAYAPUR, VIJAYAPUR vs. PRATHAMIK KRUSHI PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT SARWAD, SARWAD

In the result, all the 3 appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

reassessment order was passed wherein the addition of Rs.1,71,32,728/- was made to the total income of the assessee and further it was held that assessee is not entitled to deduction u/s. 80P of the Act. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the written submission was made by the assessee