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

disallowing the claim of the assessee and referring to the provisions of section 80P(4) which is entire difference from section 80P(2

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

section 80P(2)(d) of the Act amounting to Rs. 19,20,642/- is required to be disallowed acquiescence. 6.5 So far as disallowance

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

section 80P(2)(d) of the Act amounting to Rs. 19,20,642/- is required to be disallowed acquiescence. 6.5 So far as disallowance

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

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(2

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

section 80P(2)(d) under which the interest income/dividend income received from Co-operative Society only is eligible for deduction. On appeal the CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assesse u/s 80P(2)(d) in respect of the interest received from Bhopal Co-operative Central Bank but confirmed the disallowance

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

disallowing the claim made u/s 57 and u/s 80P(2)(f) of the Act, thereby assessing the income at Rs. 10,77,819/-. 6. Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and made detailed submission stating that the assessee society also deals with daily deposit account and these deposits normally get matured in one year

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

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

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

VRAHATAKAR SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT AMLETHA,AMLETHA vs. ITO-1, RATLAM

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

section 250(6).\n4. Ld. AR has also filed a \"Written-Submission\" as well as an\n\"Application for additional evidences”; these are scanned and re-produced\nbelow:\nWritten-Submission:\nPage 2 of 10\nVrahatakar Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit\nITA No. 379/Ind/2025 - AY 2017-18\nBEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH,\nINDORE\nITA NO. ITA 379/IND/2025\nASST. YEAR

PRATHMIK KRASI SAKH SAHKA RI SAMITI MARYADIT SAKHTALI,MANDSAUR vs. ITO, MANDSAUR, MANDSAUR

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2021-22 Prathmik Krasi Sakh Ito, Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Mandsaur Sakhtali, बनाम/ 1, Sakhtali, Sitamau, Vs. Mandsaur (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaajp0382L Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 10.04.2026

disallowance of deduction u/s 80P made by AO and upheld by CIT(A). 4. Ld. AR for assessee at first submitted following working of deduction of Rs. 24,06,897/- claimed by assessee in his Written-Synopsis: Page 2 of 7 Prathmik Krasi Sakh Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Sakhtali ITA No. 299/Ind/2025 – AY 2021-22 5. Thereafter, Ld. AR carried

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

Appeals are dismissed

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

Section 80P(2(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.” 3. Thus, the issue involved in both years is identical with change of figures only. The revenue is claiming that the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by AO on account of disallowance

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

2 M.P. Police Sakh Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit– A.Y 2020-21 material fact that the earlier assessment years the claim of the appellant as regard to deduction under section 80P qua the interest income on deposits with bank was duly allowed even in the earlier assessments framed u/s. 143(3) of the Act and therefore in absence of any change

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

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowed a deduction under Section 80P due to the return of income not being filed within the due date, a practice that the assessee contended was not permissible under Section 143(1) before its amendment.", "held": "The Tribunal condoned the delay of 349 days in filing the appeal, subject to a cost of Rs. 2

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

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.”\nThus, the revenue is claiming that the CIT(A) has erred in\ndeleting the addition made by AO on account of disallowance

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

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

2. 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

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

disallowance of deduction u/s 80P by the CPC, while processing the return u/s 143(1) has been considered by this Tribunal in the case of Nagar Palika Nigam Page 2 of 7 Shree Sidh Balaji Sakh Sahkarita Maryadit, Ujjain Assessment year 2019-20 Karmchari Kalyan Sakh Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit (supra) in para 6 to 9 as under :- “6. We first