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.

21 results for “capital gains”+ Section 80P(2)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore131Mumbai85Panaji69Karnataka59Delhi52Raipur47Kolkata33Cochin25Chennai21Lucknow18Hyderabad18Pune16Jaipur15Surat12Ahmedabad12Visakhapatnam11Chandigarh8Telangana6Nagpur6Indore5Cuttack4Kerala3SC3Varanasi3Amritsar3Calcutta2Rajkot2

Key Topics

Section 14A37Section 80P(2)(a)29Disallowance13Section 269S10Deduction10Section 143(3)8Section 271D8Section 1326Section 80P(2)(d)5

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WANAPARTHY BLOCK vs. TAMILNADU SPECIAL POLICE EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE, TSP CAMP

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 363/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:363/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Income Tax Officer, Tamilnadu Special Police Non-Corporate Ward -7(3), Vs. Employees Cooperative, Chennai – 600 034. Avadi, Chennai – 600 054. [Pan:Aafat-0366-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, J.C.I.T. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. G. Reddi Prakash, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2020-21, Dated 11.10.2024. 2. At The Outset, We Find That There Is A Delay Of 34 Days In Appeal Filed By The Revenue, For Which Petition For Condonation Of Delay Along With Reasons For Delay Has Been Filed. After Considering The Petition Filed By The Revenue & Also Hearing Both The Parties, We Find That There Is A Reasonable Cause For The Revenue In Not Filing Appeal On Or Before The Due Date Prescribed Under The Law & Thus

For Appellant: Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, J.C.I.TFor Respondent: Shri. G. Reddi Prakash, C.A
Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

Section 80P4
Addition to Income3
Condonation of Delay3
Section 80P(2)(a)
Section 80P(2)(d)

Gains of Business" as the same cannot be said to be attributable to the activities of the society of providing credit facilities to its members. Therefore the income earned by the assessee is nothing but "Income from Other Sources liable to be taxed. On the facts and circumstances of this case, interest income and dividend income falls in the category

IRULA SNAKE CATCHERS INDUSTRIAL CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, WARD-22(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, and

ITA 1790/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shris.R.Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं. (Ita No.1790/Chny/2025 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2020-21 Irula Snake Catchers Industrial Co- V. Income Tax Officer, Operative Society Ltd, Non-Coporate Ward 22(1), Mahabalipuram Road, Tambaram Vadanemmli Village, Perur Post, Chennai-603 104 [Pan:Aaaai 7894 M] (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G Baskar, Advocate &For Respondent: Mr. Gouthami Manivasagam
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी मनुकुमारिग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा लेखासद" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRIS.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. (ITA No.1790/Chny/2025 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2020-21 Irula Snake Catchers Industrial Co- v. Income Tax Officer, Operative Society Ltd, Non-Coporate Ward 22(1), Mahabalipuram Road, Tambaram Vadanemmli Village, Perur Post, Chennai

SOUTHERN RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,TIRUCHIRAPALLI vs. DCIT, CIRLCE-1(1), TRICHY

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2478/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI JAGADISH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.M.Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

B’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु कुमार गिरि, न्यागयक सदस्य एवं माननीय श्री जगदीश, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.2478/2024 (धििाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Southern Railway Employees Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Cooperative Credit Society Ltd, Income Tax, No.1, Tiruchirappalli Cantonment

SOUTHERN RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. ,TIRUCHIRAPPALLI vs. DCIT, CRICLE-1(1), TRICHY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2426/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Sheila Parthasarthy
Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी अिमताभ शु"ा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2426/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 v. M/s. Southern Railway Employees- The DCIT, Co-op. Credit Society Ltd., Circle-1(1), No.1, Tiruchirappalli

SHRI T.N. RAJAMOHAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the assesse’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2540/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 54F

section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The Delhi High Court in the case of Mr. Vijay Gupta decided on 20.03.2016 referred to the decision of the :-7-: Supreme Court reported in 261 ITR 367 and the Apex Court in the said decision has held that if the assessee has by mistake or inadvertently or on account of ignorance included

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1), CHENNAI vs. REPCO HOME FINANCE P LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA no

ITA 2885/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: JCITFor Respondent: Shri M. Viswanathan, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(viii)

capital and of the general reserves of the specified entity, no allowance under this clause shall be made in respect of such excess. Explanation.- in this clause, (a) "specified entity" means,- (i) a financial corporation specified in section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) ; (ii) a financial corporation which is a public sector company ; (iii) a banking

M/S MADRAS RACE CLUB,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPO CIRCLE 4 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 501/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar & Shri I. DineshFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194C

b) in respect of transport subsidy also, we notice that the assessee has met part of transportation expenses incurred by the horse owners in the form of reimbursement made to them. The primary liability to deduct TDS would lie upon the horse owners, since they have incurred the cost of transportation. The assessee has only reimbursed part of transportation cost

M/S MADRAS RACE CLUB,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPO CIRCLE 4 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 502/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar & Shri I. DineshFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194C

b) in respect of transport subsidy also, we notice that the assessee has met part of transportation expenses incurred by the horse owners in the form of reimbursement made to them. The primary liability to deduct TDS would lie upon the horse owners, since they have incurred the cost of transportation. The assessee has only reimbursed part of transportation cost

M/S MADRAS RACE CLUB,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPO CIRCLE 4 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 503/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar & Shri I. DineshFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194C

b) in respect of transport subsidy also, we notice that the assessee has met part of transportation expenses incurred by the horse owners in the form of reimbursement made to them. The primary liability to deduct TDS would lie upon the horse owners, since they have incurred the cost of transportation. The assessee has only reimbursed part of transportation cost

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -4, PUDUCHERRY vs. KALAPET PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. , PONDICHERRY

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes’’

ITA 2190/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Mrs. S. Vijayaprabha, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. T. Vasudevan, Advocate
Section 5Section 56Section 80Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

capital and reserves exceeded one lakh of rupees. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred by failing to consider that the assessee is a primary co-operative bank with reference to Clause (ccv) of Section 56 of Part-V considered together with Section 5(b) of Banking Regulations Act, 1949. 7. The ITAT in its order

ITO, NAMAKKAL vs. TIRUCHENGODE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING SOCIETY LIMITED, NAMAKKAL

In the result, the Revenues’ appeals are allowed and the assessee’s COs, dismissed

ITA 362/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 02.08.2017
Section 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(a)

B) members, to whom the bulk of the jewel loans had been extended, did not qualify to be members, for the assessee to be eligible for the deduction u/s. 80P(1) in respect of interest on jewel loans, claimed u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i), which reads as under: ‘Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies. 80P. (1) Where

ITO, NAMAKKAL vs. TIRUCHENGODE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING SOCIETY LIMITED, NAMAKKAL

In the result, the Revenues’ appeals are allowed and the assessee’s COs, dismissed

ITA 363/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 02.08.2017
Section 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(a)

B) members, to whom the bulk of the jewel loans had been extended, did not qualify to be members, for the assessee to be eligible for the deduction u/s. 80P(1) in respect of interest on jewel loans, claimed u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i), which reads as under: ‘Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies. 80P. (1) Where

POTHERI VILLAGE WEANING FOOD MANUFACTURING WOMENS DEVELOPMENT INDUSTRIAL COOP,KANCHEEPURAM vs. ITO, NCW 22(1), TAMBARAM

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1055/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1055/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Potheri Village Weaning Food Income Tax Officer, Manufacturing Womens V. Non-Corporate Ward – 22(1), Development Industrial Coop, Tambaram. 12, Amman Koil Street, Potheri Katankolathur Post, Kanchipuram – 603 203. [Pan: Aaaap-9745-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. I. Dinesh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Aroon Prasad, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. I. Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Aroon Prasad, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 8O

Section 80P(2)(a)(ii) of the Act by a ‘cottage industry’ have been specified in para 3 as detailed below: “(a) a cottage industry is one which is carried on a small scale with a small amount of capital and a small number of workers and has a turnover which is correspondingly limited; (b) it should not be required

THE KARUR VYSYA BANK LTD.,KARUR vs. JCIT, TRICHY

Accordingly, the claim of the assessee that it had to be allowed on actual payment basis was, in our opinion, rightly allowed by the CIT(Appeals)

ITA 2325/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT
Section 14A

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, the principle is equally applicable to all banks/commercial banks, to which Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applies. 4. In the light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the matter, the issue is well settled. Accordingly, the Board has decided that no appeals may henceforth be filed on this ground by the officers

DCIT, TRICHY vs. THE KARUR VYSYA BANK LTD., KARUR

Accordingly, the claim of the assessee that it had to be allowed on actual payment basis was, in our opinion, rightly allowed by the CIT(Appeals)

ITA 2433/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT
Section 14A

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, the principle is equally applicable to all banks/commercial banks, to which Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applies. 4. In the light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the matter, the issue is well settled. Accordingly, the Board has decided that no appeals may henceforth be filed on this ground by the officers

THE KARUR VYSYA BANK LTD.,KARUR vs. JCIT, TRICHY

Accordingly, the claim of the assessee that it had to be allowed on actual payment basis was, in our opinion, rightly allowed by the CIT(Appeals)

ITA 2326/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT
Section 14A

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, the principle is equally applicable to all banks/commercial banks, to which Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applies. 4. In the light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the matter, the issue is well settled. Accordingly, the Board has decided that no appeals may henceforth be filed on this ground by the officers

DCIT, TRICHY vs. M/S. THE KARUR VYSYA BANK. LTD., KARUR

Accordingly, the claim of the assessee that it had to be allowed on actual payment basis was, in our opinion, rightly allowed by the CIT(Appeals)

ITA 2649/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT
Section 14A

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, the principle is equally applicable to all banks/commercial banks, to which Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applies. 4. In the light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the matter, the issue is well settled. Accordingly, the Board has decided that no appeals may henceforth be filed on this ground by the officers

R. ANBUVEL RAJAN ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL RANGE 1, CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 2166/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

gain by not filing the appeals. The action of the assessee can’t be termed to action of the assessee can’t be termed to be deliberate and therefore, we be deliberate and therefore, we condone the delay of 262 days in filing of both the appeals and proceed to condone the delay of 262 days in filing of both

R. ANBUVEL RAJAN ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL RANGEL, CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 2165/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

gain by not filing the appeals. The action of the assessee can’t be termed to action of the assessee can’t be termed to be deliberate and therefore, we be deliberate and therefore, we condone the delay of 262 days in filing of both the appeals and proceed to condone the delay of 262 days in filing of both

COMPUTER AGE MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LTU 2 , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the assessment years are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1142/CHNY/2018[214-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Dec 2018

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1140, 1141 & 1142/Chny/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Computer Age Management Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Services Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax, Rayala Towers, 3Rd Floor, Ltu-2, 158, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai 600 002. [Pan Aaacc 3035G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, R. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 14A

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act but would also be applicable to all banks/commercial banks, to which Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applies. 38. From this, the Punjab and Haryana High Court pointed out that this circular carves out a distinction between "stock-in-trade" and "investment" and provides that if the motive behind purchase and sale of shares