THE MANTOLA COOPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-62(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 4078/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6935/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 2036/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 The Mantola Cooperative Vs Income Tax Officer, Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., Ward-62(5), 541, Mantola, Phar Ganj, New Delhi New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaajt1976A Assessee By : Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2020

68,38,319 54,12,931 80P(2)(a)(i) Tax demand if deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) is restricted to income earned from 80,77,256 76,45,770 84,00,520 members only Alternate claim of deduction considering deduction under section 80P(2)(d

MANTOLA COOPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-62(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 4078/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6935/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 2036/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 The Mantola Cooperative Vs Income Tax Officer, Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., Ward-62(5), 541, Mantola, Phar Ganj, New Delhi New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaajt1976A Assessee By : Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2020

68,38,319 54,12,931 80P(2)(a)(i) Tax demand if deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) is restricted to income earned from 80,77,256 76,45,770 84,00,520 members only Alternate claim of deduction considering deduction under section 80P(2)(d

SAINI CO-OPERATIVE THARIFT AND CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-48(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

section 80P(2)(a)(i) deduction of Rs.1,03,68,974/-; representing it’s interest received from fixed deposit in cooperative society/cooperative/nationalized banks; as the case may be, as not “derived” from the eligible business in light of Totgar’s Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. Vs. ITO (2010) 322 ITR 283 (SC). 4. Learned departmental representative vehemently supports

SAINI CO-OPERATIVE THARIFT AND CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-48(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

section 80P(2)(a)(i) deduction of Rs.1,03,68,974/-; representing it’s interest received from fixed deposit in cooperative society/cooperative/nationalized banks; as the case may be, as not “derived” from the eligible business in light of Totgar’s Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. Vs. ITO (2010) 322 ITR 283 (SC). 4. Learned departmental representative vehemently supports

CAIRN UK HOLDING LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 5 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

2)/2Q13-14/453 dated ' 25.02.2014" (Emphasis added) 6.8 Further, in the said reasons, at various places reference was given of the February 2014. This goes to prove that the survey report was received by the AO in the month of February 2014 only. 6.9 In view of the above, the Appellant submits that since the survey report had been received

DCIT, NAJIBABAD vs. M/S KISAN SAHKARI CHINNI MILLS LTD., NAJIBABAD

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

Bench: the due date of filing the return.

80P(2)(d) of the Act for Rs.10,00,000/- and restricted the claim of deduction only to Rs.2,94,68,223/- (3,04,68,223-10,00,000). The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 6. At the outset, we find that the assessee had given loans to three Co-operative Societies and earned interest income

THE GENERAL MANAGER,NAJIBABAD vs. ACIT, NAJIBABAD

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

Bench: the due date of filing the return.

80P(2)(d) of the Act for Rs.10,00,000/- and restricted the claim of deduction only to Rs.2,94,68,223/- (3,04,68,223-10,00,000). The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 6. At the outset, we find that the assessee had given loans to three Co-operative Societies and earned interest income

DISTRICT CO- OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. A.T.Varkey, Jm & Sh. Prashant Maharishi, Am Ita No. 3533/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08

68,580/- on 24.11.2009. 03. While passing assessment order AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the act. In response to the penalty notice assessee submitted before AO that :- a. The Deduction was available to the assessee up to A Y 2006-07 and therefore this year assessee was under impression about the availability of this deduction

CA COOPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,DELHI vs. PCIT, DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

D-25, 2nde Floor, Gali No. 10 Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi PAN: AADAC 6816 A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Yudhister Mehtani, CA Department By : Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 13.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 15.09.2023 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- The above captioned two separate appeals by the assessee are preferred against the order

CA COOPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED ,DELHI vs. PCIT, DELHI-20, DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

D-25, 2nde Floor, Gali No. 10 Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi PAN: AADAC 6816 A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Yudhister Mehtani, CA Department By : Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 13.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 15.09.2023 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- The above captioned two separate appeals by the assessee are preferred against the order

MUZAFFARNAGAR DISTT. COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT FEDERATION LTD.,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ACIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt Suchitra Kamble

68,467.74 The net profit of Rs.6,16,467,74/- so derived above was claimed to be exempted u/s 80P(2) (i)(a). It was noticed by the A.O that the profit is mainly due to interest and head office (Fertilizers sale transportation storage). The A.O also gathered on examining the two accounts that income from transportation at Rs.5

M/S MUZAFFARNAGAR DISTT. CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT FEDERATION LTD.,UTTAR PRADESH vs. ADDL. CIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt Suchitra Kamble

68,467.74 The net profit of Rs.6,16,467,74/- so derived above was claimed to be exempted u/s 80P(2) (i)(a). It was noticed by the A.O that the profit is mainly due to interest and head office (Fertilizers sale transportation storage). The A.O also gathered on examining the two accounts that income from transportation at Rs.5

M/S MUZAFFARNAGAR DISTT. CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT FEDERATION LTD.,UTTAR PRADESH vs. ADDL. CIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt Suchitra Kamble

68,467.74 The net profit of Rs.6,16,467,74/- so derived above was claimed to be exempted u/s 80P(2) (i)(a). It was noticed by the A.O that the profit is mainly due to interest and head office (Fertilizers sale transportation storage). The A.O also gathered on examining the two accounts that income from transportation at Rs.5

M/S. M.NAGAR DISTT. CO-OP DEVELOPMENT FED. LTD.,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. JCIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt Suchitra Kamble

68,467.74 The net profit of Rs.6,16,467,74/- so derived above was claimed to be exempted u/s 80P(2) (i)(a). It was noticed by the A.O that the profit is mainly due to interest and head office (Fertilizers sale transportation storage). The A.O also gathered on examining the two accounts that income from transportation at Rs.5

ACIT CIRCLE-54(1), NEW DELHI vs. NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

d are regarding deletion of the addition of Rs. 97,68,269/- for the AY 2011-12 made by the A.O. u/s 14A. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that ‘the disallowance u/s14A read with Rule 8D has been computed and added to the income of the assessee. The various case laws have also been referred

ACIT CIRCLE-54(1), NEW DELHI vs. NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

d are regarding deletion of the addition of Rs. 97,68,269/- for the AY 2011-12 made by the A.O. u/s 14A. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that ‘the disallowance u/s14A read with Rule 8D has been computed and added to the income of the assessee. The various case laws have also been referred

ACIT CIRCLE-54(1), NEW DELHI vs. NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

d are regarding deletion of the addition of Rs. 97,68,269/- for the AY 2011-12 made by the A.O. u/s 14A. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that ‘the disallowance u/s14A read with Rule 8D has been computed and added to the income of the assessee. The various case laws have also been referred

NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-32(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

d are regarding deletion of the addition of Rs. 97,68,269/- for the AY 2011-12 made by the A.O. u/s 14A. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that ‘the disallowance u/s14A read with Rule 8D has been computed and added to the income of the assessee. The various case laws have also been referred

MUFG BANK LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE-2(2)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Mufg Bank Ltd, Vs. Acit (International Taxation), 5Th Floor, Worldmark 2, Asset 8, Circle-2(2)(1), Aerocity, Nh-8, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabct3880D (Appellant) (Respondent)

d. Section 14A does not apply as income earned from securitization trust is taxable under section 115TA of the Act. e. Disallowance made under Rule – 8D(2)(ii) is bad as the assessee had enough interest free funds available. Each of the aforesaid contention is explained in detail below. Section 14A is not applicable in case