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

68 taxmann.com 298 (Ker.) having decided the very issue in assessee’s favour. Ordered accordingly. Vilvattam Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. 5. The Revenue’s next vehement contentions seeks to treat the assessee as a cooperative bank u/sec.80P(2)(4) than a credit cooperative society as per Pr. CIT vs. Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank

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

68 taxmann.com 298 (Ker.) having decided the very issue in assessee’s favour. Ordered accordingly. Vilvattam Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. 5. The Revenue’s next vehement contentions seeks to treat the assessee as a cooperative bank u/sec.80P(2)(4) than a credit cooperative society as per Pr. CIT vs. Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank

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

68,214/- as income from other sources and consequently denied deduction u/s 80P of the Act on this amount. The assesse filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A)/NFAC, held that the assesse is eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act on the business income but the action of the AO in denial of section

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

68,214/- as income from other sources and consequently denied deduction u/s 80P of the Act on this amount. The assesse filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A)/NFAC, held that the assesse is eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act on the business income but the action of the AO in denial of section

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

68,214/- as income from other sources and consequently denied deduction u/s 80P of the Act on this amount. The assesse filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A)/NFAC, held that the assesse is eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act on the business income but the action of the AO in denial of section

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.

68 taxmann.com 298). He has submitted a copy of the P&L account in Annexure-2 which reads as follows: - S.No. Loss Rs. S.No. Profit Rs. 1 Total loss as per 1 Total profit as per trading account trading account 2 Interest 7359077 2 Interest receivable 5978097 outstanding 3 Establishment 1304782 3 expenses 4 Contingency 1231087 4 Miscellaneous 4242442 expenses

M/S.PERRORKADA SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

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

section 80P(2)(a)(i). (vi) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of CIT(A) is correct in not duly considering the following case laws (a) Sabargantha Zilla Kharid Vechar Sangh Ltd. (203 ITR 1027) (SC) (b) Perinthalmanna Service Co-operative Bank (363 ITR 68) (Kerala) (c) CIT Vs Kerala State

M/S.PEROORKADA SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO, WD-2(1), TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

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

section 80P(2)(a)(i). (vi) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of CIT(A) is correct in not duly considering the following case laws (a) Sabargantha Zilla Kharid Vechar Sangh Ltd. (203 ITR 1027) (SC) (b) Perinthalmanna Service Co-operative Bank (363 ITR 68) (Kerala) (c) CIT Vs Kerala State

M/S.PERRORKADA SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

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

section 80P(2)(a)(i). (vi) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of CIT(A) is correct in not duly considering the following case laws (a) Sabargantha Zilla Kharid Vechar Sangh Ltd. (203 ITR 1027) (SC) (b) Perinthalmanna Service Co-operative Bank (363 ITR 68) (Kerala) (c) CIT Vs Kerala State

M/S.PEROORKADA SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO, WD-2(1), TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

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

section 80P(2)(a)(i). (vi) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of CIT(A) is correct in not duly considering the following case laws (a) Sabargantha Zilla Kharid Vechar Sangh Ltd. (203 ITR 1027) (SC) (b) Perinthalmanna Service Co-operative Bank (363 ITR 68) (Kerala) (c) CIT Vs Kerala State

THE ITO, TRIVANDRUM vs. M/S.PERRORKADA SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

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

section 80P(2)(a)(i). (vi) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of CIT(A) is correct in not duly considering the following case laws (a) Sabargantha Zilla Kharid Vechar Sangh Ltd. (203 ITR 1027) (SC) (b) Perinthalmanna Service Co-operative Bank (363 ITR 68) (Kerala) (c) CIT Vs Kerala State

THE MANNUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,PALAKKAD vs. THE ITO WD-2, PALAKKAD

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

4) nor in response to the notices issued u/s 148 and 142(1) of the I.T.Act. The Assessing Officer concluded that as per section 80A(5) of the I.T.Act, the assessee is not entitled to any deduction on account of non-filing of the return. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer denying the benefit of deduction

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

68 r.w.s. 115 BBE on account of unsecured loan taken other deposits 4 Unexplained money u/s. 69A r.w.s. 115BBE 5,87,91,516 of the Act on account of source loan/ advances given 5 Cessation of liability u/s. 41(1) of the Act 1,57,54,371 6 Disallowance of provisions debited in Profit 46,45,372 & Loss A/c. Total

THE ITO, WD-2(5), TVM, TVM vs. THE CHIRAYINKEEZHU SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD, TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

68 (Kerala) wherein it was held that "with introduction of section 80P(4) necessarily, an enquiry has to be conducted

THE ITO, WD-2(5), TVM, TVM vs. THE CHIRAYINKEEZHU SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD, TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

68 (Kerala) wherein it was held that "with introduction of section 80P(4) necessarily, an enquiry has to be conducted

THE ITO, WD-2(5), RG-2, TVM, TVM vs. M/S.EDACKODU SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD, TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

68 (Kerala) wherein it was held that "with introduction of section 80P(4) necessarily, an enquiry has to be conducted

THE ITO, WD-2(5), RG-2, TVM, TVM vs. M/S.EDACKODU SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD, TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

68 (Kerala) wherein it was held that "with introduction of section 80P(4) necessarily, an enquiry has to be conducted

VENGOLA SERVICE CO OP BANK LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO, WARD 2, ALUVA

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Keshav Dubey, Jm Assessment Year: 2018-19 Vengola Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant 13/621 Ab, Kunnathunadu Vengola P.O., Ernakulam 683556 [Pan: Aaaav1709N] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward - 2, Aluva Appellant By: Shri Lokanathan R., Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 06.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.01.2025

68,81,663/-. Unless the delay in return filing is condoned, the deduction u/s. 80P cannot be availed by the appellant. Therefore, in view of the above, the claim of the appellant is dismissed.” 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 5. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties