INDORE SAHAKARI DUGDH SANGH MARYADIT,DAIRY COMPOUND, MANGLIA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), NFAC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

1. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in disallowing, allowable Deduction of Interest Income validly Claimed for Rs. 22867733/- by incorrectly interpreting provision of Section 80P

INDORE SAHAKARI DUGDH SANGH MARYADIT,DAIRY COMPOUND, MANGLIA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NFAC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

1. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in disallowing, allowable Deduction of Interest Income validly Claimed for Rs. 22867733/- by incorrectly interpreting provision of Section 80P

SHREE SIDH BALAJI SAKH SAHKARITA MARYADIT,UJJAIN vs. ASST DIRECTOR CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2019-20 Shree Sidh Balaji Sakh Assistant Director Cpc, Sahkarita Maryadit, Bangalore बनाम/ Ramghat Marg, Vs. Ujjain (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaja57480G Assessee By Ms.Sonam Khandelwal, Adv. Revenue By Shri Sanjeev H.Bhagat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.12.2024

80P of the Act shall be allowed to an assessee unless he furnishes a return of his income on or before the due date specified under section 139(1) w.e.f. assessment year 2018-19 onwards. However, section 143(1)(a)(v) of the Act provides that disallowance

MP STATE CO-OPERATIVE DAIRY FEDERATION LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. ACIT, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

1,07,86,645/- Therefore, the excess claim made under the provision of section 80P(2)(d) of the Act amounting to Rs. 19,20,642/- is required to be disallowed

MP STATE COOPERATIVE DAIRY FEDERATION LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. ACIT BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

1,07,86,645/- Therefore, the excess claim made under the provision of section 80P(2)(d) of the Act amounting to Rs. 19,20,642/- is required to be disallowed

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

80P of the Act shall be allowed to an assessee unless he furnishes a return of his income on or before the due date specified under section 139(1) w.e.f. assessment year 2018-19 onwards. However, section 143(1)(a)(v) of the Act provides that disallowance

HARDA NAGAR BAL VIKAS SAMITI HARDA ,SARSWATI SHISHU MANDIR vs. ITO-1, HARDA, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in terms mentioned above

1) and section 148, the returns were indeed non-est and could not have been acted upon by the Assessing Officer even though they were filed before the completion of the assessment.\n12. There is yet another aspect of the matter. The requirement of making the claim for deduction in a return of income filed by the assessee

SANKALP SAKH SAHKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,MANDSAUR vs. THE PCIT-1 , INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assesse is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisankalp Sakh Sahkari Pr. Cit-1 Sanstha Maryadit Indore 1, C/O Smriti Nagrik Sahkari Vs. Bank Dayamandir Road Goshala Market, Mandsaur (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaeas0312G Assessee By Shri Anil Kamal Garg, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.01.2024

1) shall be the following, namely: (a) in the case of a co-operative society engaged in- (b)….. c)………. (d) In respect of any income by way of interest or dividends derived by the co-operative society from its investments with any other co-operative society, the whole of such income. Section 80P(2)(d) envisages deduction for interest income

THE PR CIT-1 , BHOPAL vs. BHOPAL DUGDH SANGH SAHAKARI MY., BYHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and CO of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanipr. Cit-1 Bhopal Dugdh Sangh Sahakari Bhopal Maryadit Diary Plant, Near Habibganj Vs. Railway Station Bhopal (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent/ Assessee) Pan: Aaaab0221D

disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of the interest income received by the assessee on the fixed deposit made with Bhopal Co-operative Central Bank on the ground that the only interest or dividend received on the investment made with the other Co-operative Society is eligible for deduction u/s 80P

SIDDHLAXMI SAKH SAHAKARITA MY,,INDORE vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) W,INDORE, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

disallowing the deduction under sub- clause (i) of clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 80P of the Act is under challenged. 3. We have heard the parties and perused the materials available on record. 4. The assessee is a credit co-operative society providing credit facilities to its members. The interest income from the surplus invested in short

GAJRA GEARR KAMGAR SSHAKARI SANSTHA MY.,DEWAS vs. THE DCIT,CPC , BANGLORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2018-19 Gajra Gears Kamgar Dcit, Cpc Sahakari Sanstha Bangalore Maryadit, बनाम/ C/O Gajra Gears Pvt. Ltd., Station Road, Vs. Dewas (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aabag2492C Assessee By Shri Sharad Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2023

80P amounting to Rs. 8,61,958/-. However, in the intimation of assessment u/s 143(1), Ld. AO disallowed deduction claimed by assessee precisely for the reason that the return was filed belatedly on 08.03.2019 after due date u/s 139(1) [due date was 31.08.2018] and therefore the deduction was not allowable by virtue of section

INDORE PRAGATISHIL SAHAKARI SAKH SANSTHA MARYADIT,INDORE vs. NFAC, DELHI, INDORE

Appeal stand allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2018-19 Indore Pragatishil Income Tax Department, Sahakari Sakh Sanstha Nfa, बनाम/ Maryadit, Delhi Vs. Indore. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaaai3124L Assessee By Shri S.S.Deshpande, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.01.2024

1) of the Act were issued and duly served upon the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the ld. AO noticed that the assessee had claimed deduction u/s 57 of the Act at Rs. 10,38,991 against the income from interest on FDR of Rs. 10,77,910/- and deduction of Rs. 20,000/- u/s 80P

SHRI HUMAD JAIN SAKH SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,INDORE vs. ITO 2(1), INDORE

Appeal is allowed

sections": [ "143(3)", "147", "148", "80P", "143(2)", "142(1)", "139", "148(2)" ], "issues": "Whether the AO can disallow a deduction

M. P POLICE SAKH SAHKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT UJJAIN,UJJAIN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -2(1), UJJAIN

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manish Boradm.P. Police Sakh Sahakari Ito 2(1), Sanstha Maryadit, Ujjain 32Nd Battalion, Vs. Dewas Road Nagari, Ujjain (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabam5551C Assessee By Shri Milind Wadhwani, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.02.2025 O R D E R

disallowance u/s 80P at Rs.23,92,876/- on observing that the assessee has earned the alleged sum towards the interest earned from the scheduled banks. Ld. CIT(A) gave part relief to the assessee as follows: 8. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the materials available on records and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The only

ACIT-1(1), BHOPAL vs. M P STATE CO-OP HOUSING FEDERATION LTD, BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

Section 80P(2(d) of the Income-tax\nAct, 1961.\"\n3.\nThus, the issue involved in both years is identical with change of\nfigures only. The revenue is claiming that the CIT(A) has erred in deleting\nthe addition made by AO on account of disallowance of deduction claimed\nby assessee u/s 80P

INDORE MANDAL DAK TAR KARAMCHARI SAHAKARI SANSTHA MY. INDORE,INDORE vs. THE ADDITIONAL CIT , INDORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniindore Mandal Dak Tar Acit Karamchari Sahakari Indore Vs. Sanstha Maryadit Dewas (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaaji 0159 C Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.06.2023

section 80P under chapter VI-A of the Income Tax Act, Page 1 of 12 Indore Mandal Dak Tar Karamchari Sahakari Sanstha Page 2 of 12 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. 3. That the appellant craves

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

disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80P by invoking provisions of section 80AC of the Act which was substituted by Finance Act 2018 w.e.f 01.04.2018. Therefore, this is first year post the said amendment in section 80AC putting the restriction/bar on the claim of deduction u/s 80P in case the return of income is not filed within the due date

MADHYA PRADESH VIDYUT MANDAL KARMCHARI PARASPAR SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,MANDSAUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MANDSAUR

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshimadhya Pradesh Vidyut Ito, Mandsaur बनाम/ Mandal Karmchari Vs. Paraspar Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Shop No.5 Nahar Sayyad Road, Kityani Mandsaur (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan:Aaaam6716A Assessee By Shri Ashok Ratnawat, Ar Revenue By Shri Anoop Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 10.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11.11.2025

Disallowance out of deduction claimed u/s, 80P of the IT Act. 2.1 In the relevant year i.e. A.Y. 2018-19, assessee has claimed deduction u/s 80P of the IT Act of Rs 54,43,636/- in return of income. During the assessment proceedings, vide notice dated 11.12.2020, issued u/s 142(1) of the Act, assessee was asked to provide bifurcation