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

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

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

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

AROOR CO-OP URBAN SOCIETY LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. ITO, KOZHIKKODE

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

Bench: Shrigeorge George K.And Shrilaxmi Prasad Sahuaroor Co-Operative Urbn Society Dcit, Central Prossing Centre Aroor P.O., Kakkattil 673507 Bangalore Vs.

80A would operate by itself. In cases where returns have been filed, the question of exemptions or deductions referable to section 80P would definitely have to be considered and granted if eligible. 20. Here, questions would arise as to whether belated returns filed beyond the period stipulated under section 139(1) or section 139(4) as well as following sections

M/S KARASSERY SERVICE CO-OP BANK,CALICUT vs. THE ITO, CALICUT

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri George George. K.] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.417/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-2011. M/S. Karassery Service Co- The Income Tax Officer, Operative Bank, Vs. Ward 2(3) Karassery P.O. Kozhikode. Kozhikode.

80A(5) of the Act. As per ld. Assessing Officer assessee could only be deemed as a co-operative bank and was not eligible for such claim. Further, according to ld. Assessing Officer assessee having filed the return late claim under section 80P(2) of the Act could not be considered at all. Ld. Assessing Officer also made a disallowance

M/S KODIYATHUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK,CALICUT vs. THE ITO, CALICUT

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri George George. K.] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 414/Coch/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-2011. Vs. M/S. Kodiyathur Service Co- The Income Tax Officer, Operative Bank Ltd, Ward 2(3) Pannikode, P.O. Kozhikode. Kozhikode. [Pan Aaaak 5312L] (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/Appellant) अपीलाथ" (ू"यथ" ू"यथ" ू"यथ"/Respondent) ू"यथ"

80A(5) of the Act. As per ld. Assessing Officer assessee could only be deemed as a co-operative bank and was not eligible for such claim. Further, according to ld. Assessing Officer assessee having filed the return late claim under section 80P(2) of the Act could not be considered at all. Ld. Assessing Officer also made a disallowance

M/S.CHELANNUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,CALICUT vs. THE ITO, CALICUT

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

Bench: S/Shri Shri P K Bansal & George George K, Jm M/S Chelannur Service Cooperative Vs The Income Tax Officer Bank Ltd Ward 2(3), Calicut No.F 1242 Po Chelannur Calicut 673 616 ( Appellant) (Respondent)

section 80A(5) of the Act, deduction u/s 80P(2) shall not be allowed. 4 Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal to the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by following the order of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Kadachira Service Cooperative Bank Ltd vs ITO reported

THE ADHYAPAKA C-O-PBANK LTD , PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ITO, WARD 4, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri B.R. Baskaran, Am The Adhyapaka Cooperative D.C.I.T., Cpc Bank Ltd, No. A 300 Bangalore Vs. Puthussery P.O., Kallooppara Pathanamthtta 689602 Pan – Aaaat6387Q Appellant Respondent

disallowed amounting to Rs. 22,22,310/-. Admittedly the return filed by the assessee is a belated return but in the intimation the return has been treated as a return under Section 139 of the Act. A perusal of 2 The Adhyapaka Cooperative Bank Ltd. provisions of Section 80A

THOMAS CHACKO,KOCHI vs. THE DCIT KOCHI CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

80A(2) of the Act. Since the business income is only Rs. 7,35,054/- included in GTI of Rs. 2,31,31,119/-, the deduction u/s 80JJAA has to be restricted to Rs. 7,35,054/-, Hence, I don't find any infirmity in the restriction of deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act made by the AO in intimation

SRI.THOMAS CHACKO PROPRIETOR OF GROUP MUKKADAN,KCOHI vs. ACIT WARD-2, KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

80A(2) of the Act. Since the business income is only Rs. 7,35,054/- included in GTI of Rs. 2,31,31,119/-, the deduction u/s 80JJAA has to be restricted to Rs. 7,35,054/-, Hence, I don't find any infirmity in the restriction of deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act made by the AO in intimation

SRI.THOMAS CHACKO PROPRIETOR OF GROUP MUKKADAN,KCOHI vs. ACIT , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

80A(2) of the Act. Since the business income is only Rs. 7,35,054/- included in GTI of Rs. 2,31,31,119/-, the deduction u/s 80JJAA has to be restricted to Rs. 7,35,054/-, Hence, I don't find any infirmity in the restriction of deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act made by the AO in intimation

M/S. MARARIKULAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ITO, WD-2, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

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

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Mararikulam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. 1509, The Income Tax Mararikulam North Officer, P.O., Ward – 2, Cherthala, Alappuzha. Alappuzha – 688 549. Vs. Kerala. Pan: Aacam9305P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Amaljith P J, Ca : Smt J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. Revenue By Ar Date Of Hearing : 15-09-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 15-09-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 13/08/2021 Passed By Nfac, Delhi For A.Y. 2019-20 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: Tax Effect Relating To Grounds Of Appeal Each Ground Of Appeal (See Note Below) Intimation Order U/S. 1. 143(1) Is Against The Law Rs.7,36,849/- & Facts Of The Case

disallowing the claim of deduction u/s. 80P is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The Ld.AR also placed reliance on decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in case of Chirakkal Service Co-op Bank Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 384 ITR 490 has held that even if return of income was filed before the appellate authority

THE KADAVALUR SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO3821,THRISSUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, GURUVAYUR

In the result, the appeal and Stay Application filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Stay Application No. 150/Coch/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 637/Coch/2023 (Assessment Year: 2008-09)

2 ITA No. 637/Coch/2023 & SA No.150/Coch/2023 (A.Y.2008-09) The Kadavalur Service Co-operative Bank Limited vs. ITO furnish its ITR within the due dates as required ws 148 and 139(1) of the Act and thereby relied on the provisions of Section 80A(5) to disallow

THE ACIT,CIR-1(1),, TRIVANDRUM vs. M/S.US TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL P. LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, both appeal of the Revenue and the Cross Objection of the

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

disallowance of proportionate amount of interest relatable to the amounts diverted to the associate concerns based on the decision of Hon’ble ITAT in ITA No.02/Coch/2013 dated 20/03/2013 in the appellant’s case for AY 2008- 09, stating that the issue involved for the year under consideration is also same and identical to each other. The CIT(A) ought

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

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