REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

80A(5) and 80AC, in order to claim any deductions under section 80IA(4), the assessee should file its return of income on or before the due date prescribed under section 139(1) and further, the said claim should be made in the return furnished. Further, in order to claim deduction under section 80IA(4), as per section 80IA

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

80A(5) and 80AC, in order to claim any deductions under section 80IA(4), the assessee should file its return of income on or before the due date prescribed under section 139(1) and further, the said claim should be made in the return furnished. Further, in order to claim deduction under section 80IA(4), as per section 80IA

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

80A(5) and 80AC, in order to claim any deductions under section 80IA(4), the assessee should file its return of income on or before the due date prescribed under section 139(1) and further, the said claim should be made in the return furnished. Further, in order to claim deduction under section 80IA(4), as per section 80IA

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

80A(5) and 80AC, in order to claim any deductions under section 80IA(4), the assessee should file its return of income on or before the due date prescribed under section 139(1) and further, the said claim should be made in the return furnished. Further, in order to claim deduction under section 80IA(4), as per section 80IA

THACHANATTUKARA FARMERS PRODUCERS COMPANY,PALAKKAD vs. ITO WARD 1, PALAKKAD

In the result, all the appealsare allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

disallowance of deduction under Chapter VI-A(C) and, thus, u/s. 80P of the Act; and (v) section 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act is prima facie inapplicable. 5.2 There was before us no dispute, nor could possibly be, qua the first two propositions, advanced with reference to the decision in Dilipkumar and Co. Section 143(1

M/S OLAVANNA SERVICE CO-OP BANK,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO WARD 2(3), KOZHIKODE

In the result, all the appealsare allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

disallowance of deduction under Chapter VI-A(C) and, thus, u/s. 80P of the Act; and (v) section 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act is prima facie inapplicable. 5.2 There was before us no dispute, nor could possibly be, qua the first two propositions, advanced with reference to the decision in Dilipkumar and Co. Section 143(1

KOLLAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. ITO WARD 2 , KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appealsare allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

disallowance of deduction under Chapter VI-A(C) and, thus, u/s. 80P of the Act; and (v) section 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act is prima facie inapplicable. 5.2 There was before us no dispute, nor could possibly be, qua the first two propositions, advanced with reference to the decision in Dilipkumar and Co. Section 143(1

KADUKUTTY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD - NO: 628,THRISSUR vs. WARD 1, (1), THRISSUR, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2013-14 Kadukutty Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Kadukutty P.O., (Via) Chalakkudy, Thrissur [Pan: Aabak0755A] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Thrissur .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Yash, Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.11.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 18.07.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Co-Operative Society Registered Under The Kerala State Co-Operative Societies Act, 1969. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Accepting Deposits From Members & Providing Credit Facilities To Members. The Appellant Had Not Filed Return Of Income For Ay 2013-14 Under The Provisions Of Section 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). Based On The Information That The Appellant Had Deposited Cash In The Bank

disallowed the claim for deduction u/s. 80P of Rs. 1,36,55,587/-. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. I heard the rival contentions of both the parties

AMBALAPPUZHA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,AMBALAPPUZHA vs. ITO, WARD -2, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed the and stay application stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm & Sa No. 53/Coch/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ambalapuzha Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Kakkazham, Vandanam, Alappuzha 688005 [Pan: Aacak0787F] Vs. The Income Tax Officer. Ward-2, Alappuzha .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri Suresh Kumar Varma, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 30.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025

80A(5), the claim for deduction under Section 80P could be made by an assessee in a return filed within the time prescribed for filing such returns under any of the above provisions. The amendment to Section 80AC with effect from 1.4.2018, however, mandated that for an assessee to get a deduction under Section

EDAMALAYAR SERVICE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY IX 103A,KOTHAMANGALAM vs. ITO, WARD 1 AND TPS , THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

disallowance u/s.80P of the Act by holding that that the appellant did not file the return of income placing reliance on the provisions of section 80A(5) of the Act and also the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nileshwar Range Kallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham

THE KATTOOR SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), THRISSUR, THRISSUR

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

disallowance\nclaim u/s. 80P. However, as regards cash deposits, the CIT(A) had\nremitted the issue to the file of the AO for due verification. Thus, the\nappeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed.\n6.\nBeing aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this\nTribunal in the present appeal.\n7.\nAt the outset we find that there

THE KATTOOR SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), THRISSUR, THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

disallowance claim u/s. 80P. However, as regards cash deposits, the CIT(A) had remitted the issue to the file of the AO for due verification. Thus, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed. Kattoor Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. 6. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 7. At the outset

THE KATTOOR SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), THRISSUR, THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

disallowance claim u/s. 80P. However, as regards cash deposits, the CIT(A) had remitted the issue to the file of the AO for due verification. Thus, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed. Kattoor Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. 6. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 7. At the outset

PANANCHERY SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(4), , THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2009-10 Pananchery Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Pattikad, Pananchery, Thrissur 680652 [Pan: Aabap5815A] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(4), Thrissur .......... Respondent

disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s. 80(P) of the Act of Rs. 21,31,184/-. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 4. Being aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. The learned counsel

KOCHIN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,KOCHI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(4) &TPS, KOCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kochin Co-Operative Society Ltd. .......... Appellant Vii/1832, Lalan Road, Mattancherry Kochi 682002 [Pan: Aabak1735C] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward -2(4) & Tps, Kochi Appellant By: Ms. Niveditha K. Kamath, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit. Dr & Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 01.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.04.2025

1) of the Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a consumer co- operative society registered under the provisions of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act, 1969. The assessee had not filed return of income for the relevant assessment years. The AO completed the assessment u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income

KULASEKHARAPURAM SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.995,KOLLAM vs. ITO, WARD-5, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, ITA No. 781/Coch/2024 is dismissed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm

80A(5), the claim for deduction under Section 80P could be made by an assessee in a return filed within the time prescribed for filing such returns under any of the above provisions. The amendment to Section 80AC with effect from 1.4.2018, however, mandated that for an assessee to get a deduction under Section

KULASEKHARAPURAM SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.995,KOLLAM vs. ITO, WARD-5, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, ITA No. 781/Coch/2024 is dismissed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm

80A(5), the claim for deduction under Section 80P could be made by an assessee in a return filed within the time prescribed for filing such returns under any of the above provisions. The amendment to Section 80AC with effect from 1.4.2018, however, mandated that for an assessee to get a deduction under Section

KULASEKHARAPURAM SERVICE COPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.995,KOLLAM vs. ITO, KOLLAM

In the result, ITA No. 781/Coch/2024 is dismissed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm

80A(5), the claim for deduction under Section 80P could be made by an assessee in a return filed within the time prescribed for filing such returns under any of the above provisions. The amendment to Section 80AC with effect from 1.4.2018, however, mandated that for an assessee to get a deduction under Section

PAZHAYANNUR FARMERS SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD ,THRISSUR vs. THE ITO WARD 2(4), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals and the stay applications filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm

disallowing the claim of deduction u/s. 80P of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 5. Being aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. The learned counsel for the assessee, placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Bangalore Tribunal