M/S.PUTHIYANGADI SERVICE CO-OP BANK,CALICUT vs. THE ITO WARD 1(3), CALICUT

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 Singhassessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Puthiyangadi Service Co- The Income Tax Officer Operative Bank Limited No.F1421 V. Ward 1(3), Alappuzha. Puthiyangadi Kozhikode – 673 021 Pan : Aacap0749C. (Appellant) (Respondent)

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 2. Suffice to say that we find during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have disallowed the assessee’s section 80P(2) deduction claim representing its income derived from the Kozhikode District

CLAPPANA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK ALTD.,KARUNAGAPPALLY vs. ITO, WARD 1&TPS, ALAPPUZHA

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 Singhassessment Year: 2017-2018 M/S. Clappana Service Co-Operative The Income Tax Officer Bank Limited No.867 V. Ward 1, Alappuzha. Cp/Viii/410 & 411, Clappana Po Karunagappally, Kollam – 690 525 Pan : Aabac2747A. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Rajakannan, Advocate Respondent By : Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R. Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2024 Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : This Assessee’S Appeal For A.Y. 2017-18 Arises Against The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)]’S Din & Order No. Itba/ Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1055921666(1) Dated 11.09.2023, Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act).

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 2. Suffice to say, we find during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have disallowed the assessee’s section 80P(2) deduction claim representing its income derived from a district co-operative bank amounting to Rs.57

THE KADANAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOLLAPPALLY vs. ITO, NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTER, KOTTAYAM

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act): - Sr. ITA No. AY DIN & Order No. Date No. 1 842/Coch/2023 2017-18 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 10.10.2023 24/1056918954(1) 2 843/Coch/2023 2018-19 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 10.10.2023 24/1056919408(1) 3 844/Coch/2023 2020-21 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 10.10.2023 24/1056920417(1) The Kadanad SCB Limited. Cases called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceed

THE KADANAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. ITO, WARD-2, KOTTAYAM

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act): - Sr. ITA No. AY DIN & Order No. Date No. 1 842/Coch/2023 2017-18 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 10.10.2023 24/1056918954(1) 2 843/Coch/2023 2018-19 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 10.10.2023 24/1056919408(1) 3 844/Coch/2023 2020-21 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 10.10.2023 24/1056920417(1) The Kadanad SCB Limited. Cases called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceed

THE KADANAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. ITO, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTER, DELHI, KOTTAYAM

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act): - Sr. ITA No. AY DIN & Order No. Date No. 1 842/Coch/2023 2017-18 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 10.10.2023 24/1056918954(1) 2 843/Coch/2023 2018-19 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 10.10.2023 24/1056919408(1) 3 844/Coch/2023 2020-21 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 10.10.2023 24/1056920417(1) The Kadanad SCB Limited. Cases called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceed

KANNUR TOWN SERVICE CO-OP BANK,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD 1, KANNUR

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 Singhkannur Town Service Co-Op. The Income Tax Officer-1 Bank Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Kannur 670002 Kannothumchal [Pan: Aabak8385N] Kannur 670006 (Appellant) (Respondent)

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Heard both parties. Case file perused. 2. Suffice to say that we find during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have disallowed the assessee’s section 80P(2)(a)(i) deduction. The Revenue further seeks to fortify the same on the ground that this assessee

KARASSERY SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,MUKKAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(3), KOZHIKODE

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) as below: - Sr. ITA No. AY DIN & Order No. Date No. 1 290/Coch/2023 2007-08 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 27.03.2023 23/1051368456(1) 2 291/Coch/2023 2012-13 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 28.03.2023 23/1051481740(1) 3 292/Coch/2023 2014-15 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 29.03.2023 23/1051604022(1) Cases called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte

KARASSERY SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,MUKKAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(3), KOZHIKODE

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) as below: - Sr. ITA No. AY DIN & Order No. Date No. 1 290/Coch/2023 2007-08 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 27.03.2023 23/1051368456(1) 2 291/Coch/2023 2012-13 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 28.03.2023 23/1051481740(1) 3 292/Coch/2023 2014-15 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 29.03.2023 23/1051604022(1) Cases called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte

KARASSERY SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,MUKKAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(3), KOZHIKODE

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) as below: - Sr. ITA No. AY DIN & Order No. Date No. 1 290/Coch/2023 2007-08 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 27.03.2023 23/1051368456(1) 2 291/Coch/2023 2012-13 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 28.03.2023 23/1051481740(1) 3 292/Coch/2023 2014-15 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 29.03.2023 23/1051604022(1) Cases called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte

THE KALAKKODU SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the stay petition filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shrigeorge George K.And Shrilaxmi Prasad Sahu(Assessment Year:2018-19

250. "As per Circular No. 37/2016, the board has accepted the settled position that the disallowances made under section 32, 40(a)(ia), 40A(3), 438 etc. of the Act and other specific disallowances. relatedto the business activity against which the chapter VI-A deduction has been claimed, result in enhancement of the profits of the eligible business, and that

THE KAREEPPA PANCHAYATH SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.D,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, KOLLAM

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year : 2017-18

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2 Kareeppa Panchayat Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. \ 2. It emerges at the outset with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the sole substantive issue which arises for our apt adjudication is that of correctness of both the learned lower authorities

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

5. The learned CIT(A) ought to have considered the Judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. M/s. Provougue (India) Ltd. in ITA No. 1275/2015 to the effect that strategic investments are not excluded from the purview of section 14A read with Rule 8D. 6. The learned CIT(A) has failed to note that

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ERNAKULAM

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

5. The learned CIT(A) ought to have considered the Judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. M/s. Provougue (India) Ltd. in ITA No. 1275/2015 to the effect that strategic investments are not excluded from the purview of section 14A read with Rule 8D. 6. The learned CIT(A) has failed to note that

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

5. The learned CIT(A) ought to have considered the Judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. M/s. Provougue (India) Ltd. in ITA No. 1275/2015 to the effect that strategic investments are not excluded from the purview of section 14A read with Rule 8D. 6. The learned CIT(A) has failed to note that

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

5. The learned CIT(A) ought to have considered the Judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. M/s. Provougue (India) Ltd. in ITA No. 1275/2015 to the effect that strategic investments are not excluded from the purview of section 14A read with Rule 8D. 6. The learned CIT(A) has failed to note that

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

5. The learned CIT(A) ought to have considered the Judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. M/s. Provougue (India) Ltd. in ITA No. 1275/2015 to the effect that strategic investments are not excluded from the purview of section 14A read with Rule 8D. 6. The learned CIT(A) has failed to note that

RAMAPURAM NORTH AISWARYA PRADAYINI SCB LTD ,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ITO WARD 3, ALAPPUZHA

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 Singhassessment Year 2017-18 Ramapuram North Aiswarya Pradayini Scb Ltd. Ramapuram North, The Income Tax Officer Vs. Keerikadu P.O., Alappuzha Ward - 3, Pin - 690508 Alappuzha Pan Aacar2023D (Appellant) (Respondent)

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). 2 Ramapuram North Aiswarya Pradayini SCB Ltd. Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. We accordingly proceed ex-parte against the assessee. 2. Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive ground challenging both the learned lower authorities action disallowing sec.80P deduction claim, the Revenue first of all submits that

CHEERANCHIRA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,KOTTAYAM vs. ITO, WARD 1&TPS, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year - 2017-2018

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. Suffice to say that we find during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have disallowed the assessee’s 2 Cheeranchra Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. section 80P deduction claim. The Revenue further seeks to fortify the same