SANGAM CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY,BAGALKOT vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-2 , BAGALKOT

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

68 & 69/Bang/2023 Page 6 of 18 from RBI for carrying on banking activities, therefore as per para 9 of the said judgment, it is to be termed as a co-operative society and section 80P

M/S. SHRI MAHISHASURAMARDINI URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,HAVERI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WRD-1, HAVERI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

section 80P of the Income-tax Act. We thus answer substantial questions of law B and C formulated and enumerated above.” 10.3 I have gone through the judgments relied upon by both the parties. In my opinion, the assessment year involved in the present appeal is A.Y. 2017-2018 and the judgment of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), HUBBALLI vs. M/S. KARNATAKA VIKAS GRAMEEN BANK LIMITED, DHARWAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2016-17

80P, and/or withdrawal of the said Circular no. 319 dated 11-1-1982 in the wake of insertion of bar by virtue of sub section (4) had not gone to adversely affect 'claim for exemption' from income tax as had been put forth by the "appellant RRB". The "appellant RRB" continues to be having the status of a "cooperative

M/S KARNATAKA VIKAS GRAMEENA BANK,DHARWAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), HUBBALLI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2016-17

80P, and/or withdrawal of the said Circular no. 319 dated 11-1-1982 in the wake of insertion of bar by virtue of sub section (4) had not gone to adversely affect 'claim for exemption' from income tax as had been put forth by the "appellant RRB". The "appellant RRB" continues to be having the status of a "cooperative

MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-1, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2020-21

80P of the Act for an amount of Rs. 28,68,638/- only. The case of assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS and the assessment was completed by accepting the returned income. 4. The Ld. PCIT, Bengaluru upon examination of the assessment records was of the view that the assessment order passed by the AO was without making necessary

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 80P of the Act would not apply to the facts and circumstances of the case. In view of the above, he prayed that the disallowance of assessee Society’s claim of deduction of interest income earned from co-operative banks may be restored. 13. The ld. A.R. on the other hand in his written submissions, submitted as follows

MINORITY CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD, BAGALKOT,BAGALKOT vs. ITO W(1), BAGALKOT, BAGALKOT

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

80P(2)(a)(iii) of the Act.” 3.10 It is directed that in the event it is found that the interest is earned by the assessee from such commercial/cooperative banks that fall within the definition of “banking company’ as per section 2(c), Section 5(b) and holds license under section 22 of the Banking Regulation

BELVE VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LIMITED ,UDUPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, UDUPI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 80P of the IT Act has now been made more stringent by reducing the time available to an assessee for making the claim. 16.1 It is pertinent to deal with the case law relied on by the assessee through the learned AR of the assessee, i.e., M/s Prathamika Krishi Pattina Sahakara Sangha vs. ITO (supra) dated 13th June

BELVE VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LIMITED,UDUPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, UDUPI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 80P of the IT Act has now been made more stringent by reducing the time available to an assessee for making the claim. 16.1 It is pertinent to deal with the case law relied on by the assessee through the learned AR of the assessee, i.e., M/s Prathamika Krishi Pattina Sahakara Sangha vs. ITO (supra) dated 13th June

SRI. KALABHAIRAWESHWARA MULTI-PURPOSE CO-OP SOCIETY LTD., ,CHIKKAMAGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , CHIKKAMAGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathi. Sr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sri Kalabhairaveshwara Multi-Purpose Co- Vs. Ito, Operative Society Ltd., Ward Officer, K. M. Road,Chikmagalur District Office Ward – 1, S. O. 577 101, Karnataka. Chikmagaluru. Pan : Aapas 3058 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Mahesh R. Uppin, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neha Sahay, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 16.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.10.2024

68,097/- in Chikmagalur District Page 2 of 8 Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Therefore, notice under section 148 of the Act, was issue on 24.03.2022. In response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, assessee filed its return of income on 25.04.2022 declaring Nil income. Assessment was completed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, HOSPET vs. GAYATRI PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA, HOSPET, HOSPET

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

80P of the Act amounting to Rs.34,79,909/- and this ground was upheld. ii) With regard to disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act, the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC held that that the assessee is a co-operative society as per section 2(19) of the Act. In view of this the assessee is exempt from deduction

SRI SRI VAISHNAVI PATTINA SOUHARDHA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA,GANGAVATHI vs. ITO WARD 1, KOPPAL, KOPPAL

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18 Sri Sri Vaishnavi Pattina Souharda Sahakari Vs. Ito, Sangha Niyamita, Ward – 1, Shop No.9 T.A.P.C.M.S Complex, Koppal. C.B.S Gunj Gangavathi Dt- Koppal 583227,Karnataka. Pan : Aalas 9104 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Deepak, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ashwin D Gowda, Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 28.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2025

80P(2) of the Act, following the Circular No.37/2016 dated 02.11.2016 issued by the CBDT. Accordingly, this ground is also allowed in favour of the assessee. Further, in respect of addition made under section 68

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 80P of the Act would not apply to the facts and circumstances of the case. In view of the above, he prayed that the disallowance of assessee Society's claim of deduction of interest income earned from co-operative banks may be restored. 13. The ld. A.R. on the other hand in his written submissions, submitted as follows

BHAVASAR NAMDEV SIMPI SAMAJ SAHAKAR SANGH LTD,DANDELI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, HUBLI

In the result, we partly allow the appeal of the assessee

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

80P(2). Further, in respect of cash deposits during the demonetisation period, assessee was unable to prove the ingredients of section 68

YEDAMANGALA VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARI BANK NIYAMITHA,YEDAMANGALA, SULLIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 PUTTUR, PUTTUR, DAKSHINA KANNADA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act for ₹ 25,68,706/- only. The assessee was selected for scrutiny

SHREE BASAVESHWAR CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LIMITED,HUNGUND vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BAGALKOT

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

section 80P(4).” 3. The AO further observed that the assessee has debited Rs. 1.00/- lakh towards audit fee and pigmy commission of Rs.5,68

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

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

Bench: Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Canara Bank Staff Credit Co-Operative Vs. Ito, Society Ltd., Ward – 7(2)(2), No.26, 8Th Main Road, Bengaluru. 6Th Cross, Sampangiramanagar, Bengaluru – 560 027. Pan : Aaaac 0152 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Suresh Muthukrishna A, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel For Revenue. Date Of Hearing : 03.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.10.2023

80P(2)(a)(i) on Rs. 13,68,973/- being the Interest earned of the Statutory deposits maintained by the Society against the reserve fund in terms of the provisions of the Bye Laws of the Society as well as the provisions of the Karnataka Co- Operative Societies Act, 1959. 5. The Appellant denies itself being liable for Interest

MADAPURA vs. SBN,KODAGUVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MADIKERI

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

80P of the Act. However, the ld. CIT(A) did not considered the merits of the case and proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee was not given. As per Form No. 35, the notices were not sent on the mail address provided i.e ajitclients3@gmail.com. and at the time of ITA No.705, 706 & 707/Bang/2024 Page 5 of 19 issuing