THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 80P as District Co-operative Banks are also Co-operative societies. The deduction u/s 80P would also be available even if the interest received is assessed as income from other sources. The Commissioner(Appeals) has hence erred in not following the binding precedent of the jurisdictional High court. 3. There is a delay of 136 days in filing these

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 80P as District Co-operative Banks are also Co-operative societies. The deduction u/s 80P would also be available even if the interest received is assessed as income from other sources. The Commissioner(Appeals) has hence erred in not following the binding precedent of the jurisdictional High court. 3. There is a delay of 136 days in filing these

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 80P as District Co-operative Banks are also Co-operative societies. The deduction u/s 80P would also be available even if the interest received is assessed as income from other sources. The Commissioner(Appeals) has hence erred in not following the binding precedent of the jurisdictional High court. 3. There is a delay of 136 days in filing these

EDAVILANGU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO 3468,THRISSUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

condone the delay in filing the appeals. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a credit society providing credit facilities to its members. The assessee filed their return of income on 07/12/2018 declaring a Nil income and claimed the deduction u/s. 80P(2) of the Act. Thereafter the case was selected for complete scrutiny

EDAVILANGU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK NO 3468,THRISSUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

condone the delay in filing the appeals. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a credit society providing credit facilities to its members. The assessee filed their return of income on 07/12/2018 declaring a Nil income and claimed the deduction u/s. 80P(2) of the Act. Thereafter the case was selected for complete scrutiny

M/S KADIRUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD 2, KANNUR

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Kadirur Service Co- Operative Bank Ltd., The Income Tax Kadirur, Officer, Thalassery, Ward – 2, Kannur, Kannur. Kerala – 670 642. Vs. Pan: Aaffk6859E Appellant Respondent : Shri Arun Raj .S, Assessee By Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ilayaraja K.S, Sr. Dr

section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the courts to do substantial justice to parties by disposing of matters on de merits". The Page 6 of 16 expression “sufficient cause” employed by the Legislature is adequately elastic to enable the courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner which subserves the ends of justice

M/S CHIRAYINKEEZHU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,CHIRAYINKEEZHU vs. ITO, WARD-2(5), TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 80P deduction claim in principle and leave it open for the learned Assessing Officer to verify all necessary facts, in consequential computation as per law. Ordered accordingly. 7. Delay of 238 days in filing the instant appeal is condoned

M/S THURAYUR SERVICE CO -OP BANK LTD,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO WARD 2(1), KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and the order(s) of the Kerala High Court and other authorities to the contrary are set aside

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

80P of the Act. The questions for consideration are answered accordingly. Parties to bear their respective costs.” 5. Learned DR could hardly dispute he factual position in this regard that the assessee neither carries any banking activity(ies) with the public at large nor has it got any banking license under the provisions of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. Their

M/S THURAYUR SERVICE CO -OP BANK LTD,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO WARD 2(1), KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and the order(s) of the Kerala High Court and other authorities to the contrary are set aside

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

80P of the Act. The questions for consideration are answered accordingly. Parties to bear their respective costs.” 5. Learned DR could hardly dispute he factual position in this regard that the assessee neither carries any banking activity(ies) with the public at large nor has it got any banking license under the provisions of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. Their

M/S KOTTAYAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD 2, KANNUR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 80P deduction claim in principle and leave it open for the learned Assessing Officer to verify all necessary facts, in consequential computation as per law. Ordered accordingly. 7. Our attention is next invited to the learned lower authorities action making sec.40(a)(ia) read with Rule 194C and sec.36(i)(viia) disallowance(s) assessment year-wise, respectively. There would

M/S KOTTAYAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD 2, KANNUR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 80P deduction claim in principle and leave it open for the learned Assessing Officer to verify all necessary facts, in consequential computation as per law. Ordered accordingly. 7. Our attention is next invited to the learned lower authorities action making sec.40(a)(ia) read with Rule 194C and sec.36(i)(viia) disallowance(s) assessment year-wise, respectively. There would

VILAVATTAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 337,THRISSUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and the order(s) of the Kerala High Court and other authorities to the contrary are set aside

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 80P of the Act. The questions for consideration are answered accordingly. Parties to bear their respective costs.” 7. The Revenue’s last argument in the instant case is that assessee has extended it’s credit facilities in agricultural sector only to the of 0.2% and therefore, sec.80P relating to interest income derived there-from is not allowable. We note

VILAVATTAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 337,THRISSUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and the order(s) of the Kerala High Court and other authorities to the contrary are set aside

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 80P of the Act. The questions for consideration are answered accordingly. Parties to bear their respective costs.” 7. The Revenue’s last argument in the instant case is that assessee has extended it’s credit facilities in agricultural sector only to the of 0.2% and therefore, sec.80P relating to interest income derived there-from is not allowable. We note

AYYANTHOLE PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED 471,KARIYATTUKARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

delay in all three cases is condoned, and the appeals are\nadmitted for adjudication on merits.\n3. The core issue across all the appeals relates to the disallowance of\ndeduction claimed under Section 80P

AYYANTHOLE PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED 471,KARIYATTUKARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

delay in all three cases is condoned, and the appeals are\nadmitted for adjudication on merits.\n3. The core issue across all the appeals relates to the disallowance of\ndeduction claimed under Section 80P

ERAMALLOOR SERVICE CO-PERATIVE BANK LTDS NO.1175,CHERTHALA vs. ITO, WARD-1, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 80P of the Act was never made by the assessee through filing of return or by filing a belated return through condonation of delay

THRISSUR DISTRICT POLICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

condoning the delay of 96 days in filing both these appeals before this Tribunal and accordinglywe admit the same for adjudication. 4. Thebrief fact of the case are that the Assesseebeing an employees' co-operative society formed for the welfare of employees of Kerala Police department of Thrissur District and is registered under Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969.The Assessee

THRISSUR DISTRICT POLICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

condoning the delay of 96 days in filing both these appeals before this Tribunal and accordinglywe admit the same for adjudication. 4. Thebrief fact of the case are that the Assesseebeing an employees' co-operative society formed for the welfare of employees of Kerala Police department of Thrissur District and is registered under Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969.The Assessee