CIT vs. KRIBHCO

80P(2)(d) of the Act and, therefore, has to be disallowed under Section 14A. 5. The assessee succeeded in the first appeal and before the tribunal. We may notice that in the first appeal, the assessee had raised several contentions on merits as to the quantum of disallowance of the expenditure under the head “interest” and had pointed

ADDL. CIT, BULANDSHAHR vs. M/S. ZILA SAHKARI BANK LTD, BULANDSHAHR

In the result appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes accordingly

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiaddl. Cit, Vs. Zila Sahkari Bank Ltd, Bulandshahr Motibagh, Bulandshahr Pan:Aaaaz0005B (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 80P will not apply to any cooperative bank and accordingly deduction u/s 80P was no more available to any regional rural banks from Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. That the ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 8607600/- in view of the OM Dated 25.08.2006 addressed to RBI clarifying that regional Rural Banks would

GREAT EASTERN EXPORTS vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

house property respectively. Part B of Chapter IV which dealt with the income from interest on securities has since been deleted. Part D of ITA 267 OF 2008, ITA 1316 OF 2008, ITA 4 OF 2009, Page 11 of 37 ITA 907 OF 2009, ITA 906 OF 2008, ITA 1002 OF 2008 Chapter IV deals with computation of profits

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. As interest income is disbursed to members who had contributed to it. 4. Further as per verdict of Bangalore Club Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Interest income is not taxable as concept of mutuality has been extended to define groups of people who contribute to a common fund, controlled

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(5), GURGAON, GURUGRAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. As interest income is disbursed to members who had contributed to it. 4. Further as per verdict of Bangalore Club Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Interest income is not taxable as concept of mutuality has been extended to define groups of people who contribute to a common fund, controlled

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. As interest income is disbursed to members who had contributed to it. 4. Further as per verdict of Bangalore Club Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Interest income is not taxable as concept of mutuality has been extended to define groups of people who contribute to a common fund, controlled

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

property.’ The Assessing Officer is directed to allow necessary deductions against these incomes as per law, after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 24. In the result, appeal of the assessee for the A.Y. 2004-05 is partly allowed for statistical purposes”. 20. The above said order of the Tribunal

ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM & TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. , NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

property.’ The Assessing Officer is directed to allow necessary deductions against these incomes as per law, after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 24. In the result, appeal of the assessee for the A.Y. 2004-05 is partly allowed for statistical purposes”. 20. The above said order of the Tribunal

DELHI TOURISM & TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-10(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

property.’ The Assessing Officer is directed to allow necessary deductions against these incomes as per law, after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 24. In the result, appeal of the assessee for the A.Y. 2004-05 is partly allowed for statistical purposes”. 20. The above said order of the Tribunal

ACIT SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM & TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

property.’ The Assessing Officer is directed to allow necessary deductions against these incomes as per law, after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 24. In the result, appeal of the assessee for the A.Y. 2004-05 is partly allowed for statistical purposes”. 20. The above said order of the Tribunal

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

property.’ The Assessing Officer is directed to allow necessary deductions against these incomes as per law, after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 24. In the result, appeal of the assessee for the A.Y. 2004-05 is partly allowed for statistical purposes”. 20. The above said order of the Tribunal

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

property.’ The Assessing Officer is directed to allow necessary deductions against these incomes as per law, after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 24. In the result, appeal of the assessee for the A.Y. 2004-05 is partly allowed for statistical purposes”. 20. The above said order of the Tribunal

DELHI TOURISM TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

property.’ The Assessing Officer is directed to allow necessary deductions against these incomes as per law, after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 24. In the result, appeal of the assessee for the A.Y. 2004-05 is partly allowed for statistical purposes”. 20. The above said order of the Tribunal

GALLERIA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Galleria Condominium Vs Ito, Association, Galleria Building, Ward-1(3), Dlf Phase Iv, Dlf City, Gurgaon. Gurgaon, Haryana-122002. Pan-Aaaag3018P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rishabh Aggarwal, Ca & Ms. Jaishree, Ca Respondent By Shri Mithalesh Kumar Pandey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2022

section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. As interest income is disbursed to members who had contributed to it. 4. Further as per verdict of Bangalore Club v/s Commissioner of Income Tax, Interest income is not taxable as concept of mutuality has been extended to define groups of people who contribute to a common fund, controlled

ACIT, BULANDSHAHR vs. M/S ZILA SAHKARI BANK LTD.,, BULANDSHAHR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleacit Vs Zila Sahkari Bank Ltd. Circle, Income Tax Office, Opp. Moti Bagh Teacher’S Colony Bulandshahar Bulandshahar Aaaaz0005B (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 80P was no more available to any Regional Rural Bank (RRB) from A.Y. 2007-08. 2. Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law as well as on facts in deleting the addition of 2 Rs. 1.82.02.860/- in view of the OM dated 25.08.2006 addressed to RBI clarifying that Regional Rural Banks would not be eligible for deduction u/s 80P

M/S THE ORIENTAL INSSURANCE CO.LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmam/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd, Vs. The Dcit, A 25/27, Asaf Ali Road, Ltu, New Delhi New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaact0627R

80P(2)(a)(i), to pay income-tax thereon. The placement of such funds being imperative for the purposes of carrying on the banking business, the income derived therefrom would be income from the assessee's business." 41. In the AY in question, the AO did not accept the case of the Assessee that the income earned on the sale/redemption

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 1952/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 M/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Vs. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-1, Ltu, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi- 110002 Pan :Aaact0627R

80P(2)(a)(i), to pay income-tax thereon. The placement of such funds being imperative for the purposes of carrying on the banking business, the income derived therefrom would be income from the assessee's business." 41. In the AY in question, the AO did not accept the case of the Assessee that the income earned on the sale/redemption

DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI vs. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 1952/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 M/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Vs. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-1, Ltu, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi- 110002 Pan :Aaact0627R

80P(2)(a)(i), to pay income-tax thereon. The placement of such funds being imperative for the purposes of carrying on the banking business, the income derived therefrom would be income from the assessee's business." 41. In the AY in question, the AO did not accept the case of the Assessee that the income earned on the sale/redemption