M P RAJYA POWERLOOM BUNKAR SAHAKARI SANGH MARYADIT,BURHANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BURHANPUR

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanimp Rajya Powerloom Bunkar Income Tax Officer Sakahari Sangh Maryadit Burhanpur Vs. Burhanpur (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabam5938R Assessee By Shri Soumya Bumb, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.07.2024

condonation of delay in para 2 to 7 as under: “2. In so far as section 80P of the Act is concerned, Finance Act, 2018 substituted section 80AC of the Act w.e.r. 01 .04.2018 which provides as under – Deduction not to be allowed unless return furnished. 80AC. Where in computing the total income of an assessee of any previous year

SHRADDHA SAKH SAHKARI SANSTHA,BARWANI vs. THE ITO, SENDHWA, SENDHWA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

condone\nthe delay of 349 days in filing the present appeal subject to the cost\nof Rs.2,500/- to be paid to Prime Minister National Relief Fund.\nThe assessee shall produce the receipt of deposit of the cost with\nthe registry.\n6. The appeal of the assessee is taken up for adjudication\nwherein the assessee has raised following grounds

NAGAR PALIKA NIGAM KARMCHARI KALYAN SAKH SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,UJJAIN vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI, DELHI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2019-20 Nagar Palika Nigam Cpc, Bangaluru / Karmchari Kalyan Sakh Cit, Nfac, Delhi Sahakari Sanstha बनाम/ Maryadit, Vs. Ujjain (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aactn7778G Assessee By Ms. Sonam Khandelwal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.09.2024

2 SCC 387 that whenever substantial justice and technical considerations are opposed to each other, the cause of substantial justice must be preferred by adopting a justice-oriented approach. The case of assessee has a sufficient strength on merit. Therefore, taking into account the provision of section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take

SEWA SAHKARI SAMMITTEE MARYADIT,BEED, MUNDI KHANDWA vs. PCIT-1, INDORE

In the result, appeal by the assesse is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisewa Sahkari Sammittee Pr. Cit-2 Maryadit Beed Indore Vs. Beed Mundi Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aaufs0703N Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 05.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.10.2023

c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) Page 2 of 32 Sewa Sahakari Sammittee Maryadit Beed Page 3 of 32 of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings.” Accordingly the appeal filed by the assesse

M/S INDORE MANDAL DAK TAR KARAMCHARI SEHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,INDORE vs. THE ITO 5 (1) , INDORE

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

section 80P under chapter VI-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as is admissible deduction to a co-operative society. The addition therefore made by the AO is totally wrong and without considering the facts of the case. 4. That the appellant craves to leave, add, alter or amend any of the ground at or before hearing.” M/s. Indore