THE ERODE CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION EMP CO-OP T& C LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO, WARD 1 (1), ERODE

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.509 & 510/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021)

condonation of delay Petition u/s 119(2)(b) to treat the return as filed u/s 139(1). The appellant has filed a petition u/s 119(2)(b) dated 26.12.2023 which is still pending before the Central board of Direct Taxes. Concept of Members and Deduction u/s 80P 5) The CIT(A) ought to have seen that the Appellant

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

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

condone delay in filing of appeal and admit appeal filed by the revenue for adjudication. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a cooperative society formed with the objective providing of credit facilities to its members. The assessee filed its return of income on 21.12.2020 declaring a gross total income of Rs.4

K1104 ELAAMUTHUR PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SCOIETY,TIRUPPUR vs. ITO, WARD 2(4), TIRUPPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both the

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 1040 & 1041/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 K 1104 Elayamuthur Primary Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Co-Operative Credit V. Ward -2(4), Society, Tirupur. Elayamuthur, Udumalpet, Tirupur – 642 154. [Pan: Aabak-3636-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. R.V. Aroonprasaad, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.09.2024

condone delay in filing of appeals and admit appeals filed by the assessee for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following common grounds of appeal for both the assessment years: 1. The Order of the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) is bad and erroneous in law. 2. The Learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not considering the submissions made and decisions relied

K1104 ELAYAMUTHUR PROMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,TIRUPPUR vs. ITO, WARD 2(4), TIRUPPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both the

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 1040 & 1041/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 K 1104 Elayamuthur Primary Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Co-Operative Credit V. Ward -2(4), Society, Tirupur. Elayamuthur, Udumalpet, Tirupur – 642 154. [Pan: Aabak-3636-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. R.V. Aroonprasaad, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.09.2024

condone delay in filing of appeals and admit appeals filed by the assessee for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following common grounds of appeal for both the assessment years: 1. The Order of the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) is bad and erroneous in law. 2. The Learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not considering the submissions made and decisions relied

THE TRIPLICANE COOP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, WARD-9(1), CHENNAI

Accordingly we direct\nthe AO to allow the claim of the assessee for both AY 2020-21 & 2021-22\nsince the facts are identical.\n4.\nIn result the appeal of the assessee for both AY 2020-21 & 2021-2...

section 80P(4) of the Act does not apply to the assessee's claim as the assessee is a cooperative society, not a cooperative bank functioning at par with commercial banks. The delay in filing the return was condoned. Therefore, the deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d

THE ERODE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS CO-OPERATIVE MARKETTING SOCIETY LIMITED,ERODE vs. PCIT, COIMBATORE

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.546/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Erode Agricultural Producers Co- Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Operative Marketing Society Limited, Income Tax – Coimbatore 1, No. 293, Cauvery Road, 67-A, Race Course Road, Karungalpalayam, Erode 638 003. Coimbatore 641 018. [Pan:Aaaat8556D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate [Erode] ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.02.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax – Coimbatore 1, Coimbatore, Dated 23.03.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2017-18 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – Coimbatore 1, Coimbatore, dated 23.03.2022 relevant to the assessment year 2017-18 passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 2. The appeal filed by the assessee

DHARAPURAM PUBLIC SERVENTS CO-OP THRIFT AND CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. ,TIRUPUR vs. ITO, WARD 2(4), TIRUPUR, TIRUPUR

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2148/Chny/2025 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2021-22

delay is hereby condoned. 3. The assessee is a co-operative credit society registered under Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act and has filled return of income at Nil after claiming deduction u/s 80P of the Act. The CPC, vide intimation issued u/s.143(1) of the Act, has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d

AA520 VEERAMPALAYAM PACS LTD.,ERODE vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), ERODE

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:593/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Aa520 Veerappampalayam Ito, Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Vs. Ward -2 (1), Society Ltd., Erode. 1, Aa520, Veerappampalayam, Veerappampalayam Bo, Attavanai Hanumanpalli, Erode – 638 101. [Pan:Aadaa-8893-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. G. Vardini Karthik, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Kumar Chandan, Jcit (Virtual)

80P(2)(d) A. Furnishing of Return of Income Section 139(4) 1) The CIT(A) failed to see that the assessee had furnished his return of income within the time frame prescribed under section 139(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. B. Circular No.13/2023 allows condonation of delay

ASHOK LEYLAND EMPLOYEES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORP WARD 4(1), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal filed for the A

d) of the act and also\nappellant eligible to claim under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the act.\n6. The Ld. Assessing officer erred in relying on the case law where\nthe facts are different from the appellant's case.\n7. The appellant pleads for an opportunity to explain its case\nbefore your good self.\n8. The Appellant seeks

THE TRIPLICANE COOP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, WARD-9(1), CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2992&2993/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2021-22

section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The coordinate bench in several judicial proceedings has been consistently holding a similar view. Now coming to the issued deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) being The Triplicane Coop Credit Society Ltd. :- 4 -: disallowed on the ground of return not being filed on time, the ld AR during the course of hearing submitted that

THE PALLIPALAYAM FRMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO CIRCLE 1, , ERODE

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

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.964/Chny/2024 िनधा8रण वष8 /Assessment Year: 2018-19

D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M: Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [NFAC], Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 29.02.2024. 2. The only effective ground of appeal is against confirming the disallowances u/s 80P of the Act made by AO invoking the provisions

VYASARPADI CO-OP. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Sanjay Aroraआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.252, 253 & 254/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1996-97 To 1998-99

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. The only issue arises for consideration is disallowance of interest income earned by the assessee on the fixed deposit made with Tamil Nadu Industrial Co-operative Bank Ltd. 4. Ms. S. Sriranjani, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee under Section 80P(2

VYASARPADI CO-OP. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Sanjay Aroraआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.252, 253 & 254/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 1996-97 To 1998-99

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. The only issue arises for consideration is disallowance of interest income earned by the assessee on the fixed deposit made with Tamil Nadu Industrial Co-operative Bank Ltd. 4. Ms. S. Sriranjani, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee under Section 80P(2

ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 6(4), CHENNAI vs. THE RAILWAY EMPLOYEES CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

d) that the surplus had arisen emphatically from marketing of agricultural produces. 19.3 In the present case under consideration, the entire funds were utilized for the purposes of business and there were no surplus funds. 19.4 While comparing the state of affairs of the present assessee with that assessee (before the Supreme Court), the following clinching dissimilarities emerge, namely

ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 6(4), CHENNAI vs. THE RAILWAY EMPLOYEES CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

d) that the surplus had arisen emphatically from marketing of agricultural produces. 19.3 In the present case under consideration, the entire funds were utilized for the purposes of business and there were no surplus funds. 19.4 While comparing the state of affairs of the present assessee with that assessee (before the Supreme Court), the following clinching dissimilarities emerge, namely

ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 6(4), CHENNAI vs. THE RAILWAY EMPLOYEES CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

d) that the surplus had arisen emphatically from marketing of agricultural produces. 19.3 In the present case under consideration, the entire funds were utilized for the purposes of business and there were no surplus funds. 19.4 While comparing the state of affairs of the present assessee with that assessee (before the Supreme Court), the following clinching dissimilarities emerge, namely

INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI vs. RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

D E R PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, AM: Both these appeals in ITA No.2096/Chny/2025 and 2095/Chny/2025 are filed by the Revenue are directed against orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [herein after “ld.CIT(A)] dated 30.09.2024 for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2017-18 against the order of the Assessing officer (NFAC

INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI vs. RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY, CHENNAI

In the result, the both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

D E R PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, AM: Both these appeals in ITA No.2096/Chny/2025 and 2095/Chny/2025 are filed by the Revenue are directed against orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [herein after “ld.CIT(A)] dated 30.09.2024 for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2017-18 against the order of the Assessing officer (NFAC

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SALEM vs. PANDYAN GRAMA BANK, SALEM

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2870/Chny/2024 & Co No.06/Chny/2025 (In Ita No.: 2870/Chny/2024) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Assistant Commissioner Of Pandyan Grama Bank, Income Tax, Vs. Now Known As Tamil Nadu Grama Circle 1, Bank, Salem. No.6, Yercaud Road, Hasthampatty, Salem – 636 007. [Pan: Aahat-7854-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate & Shri. P. Gurusamy, I.T.P. Department By : Shri. Shivanand K Kalakeri, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2025

D E R PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, AM: This appeal filed by the Revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2016-17, vide order dated 18.07.2024. Since facts are identical and issues are common, appeal filed