THE DCIT, CIR-3(2) GANGTOK, GANGTOK SIKKIM vs. SIKKIM STATE COOPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITED , GANGTOK SIKKIM

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80P (2) (d) and held that the entire interest income of Rs. 2,59,49,002/-, was taxable as Income from Other Sources under section 56, as the assessee has failed to produce any evidence to show that it has incurred any expenditure wholly and exclusively to earn such interest income.” 3.3. During

GUNJA SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD,PURULIA vs. PCIT,, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Gunja Samabay Krishi Pcit, Asansol Unnayan Samity Ltd. Vill. Gunja, Golbera, P.S. Vs. Joypur, Dist. Purulia, Pin. 723103 Pan: Aabag 2110 M (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowed on the ground that you have earned interest income amounting to Rs: 39.44,212/- on deposits/investments made in financial limitation other than co- operative society/Bank and interest income is not attributable either to the activity mentioned in section 80P(2)(i)(a) of the I.T. Act 1961 or section 80P(2

ACIT, CIRCLE-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:1014-15

section 80P(2)(a)(i) deduction claim of ₹2,20,70,040/- in the nature of interest income earned from investment in fixed deposits with various banks. ITA No.1868/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2014-15 ACIT, Cir-33 Kol. Vs. Central Bank of India Employees Co-op Society Ltd. Page 2 3. This assessee is a co-operative society of employees working with

ITO, WARD - 35(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. KOLKATA RESERVE BANK EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., , KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.240/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ito, Ward-35(3), Kolkata. Vs. M/S. Kolkata Reserve Bank Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd. 13, N.S. Road, Rbi Building (Annexe), Kol- 1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabak6244L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Dr. A. K. Nayak, Cit-Dr Respondent By : Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 11/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18/10/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 10, Kolkata Dated 30.11.2017 Passed In Case No.227/Cit(A)-10/Wd.-35(3)/14-15/16-17/Kol Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S Sole Substantive Grounds Raised In The Instant Appeal Seeks To Reverse The Cit(A) Action Holding The Assessee Eligible For Section 80P(2)(D) Deduction Of Rs.6,97,20,658/- Disallowed In The Assessment Framed On 08.12.2016. Case File Suggests That The Assessee Had Derived The Impugned Interest Income From Parking Of Its Surplus Funds In Fixed Deposits With The Union Bank Of India & Central Bank Of India Fetching Interest Of Rs.6,48,17,859/- & 49,02,799/-; Respectively. The Assessing Officer Quoted Hon’Ble Apex Court’S Decision In Totgars Co-Operative Sale Society Ltd. Vs. Ito (2010) In 188 Taxman 282 (Sc)

disallowed on the ground that this income was not business profit of the assessee society but was income from other sources. The Ld. tribunal has also has held that income from investment in banks and other financial institutions is the business income of the assessee society and it is eligible to get deduction under Section 80P(2

ITO, WD-32(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL COAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION STAFF CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands allowed partly for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13 Income Tax Officer, M/S National Coal बनाम Ward-32(2),Pr. Development Corporation / Commissioner Of Staff Co-Operative Credit V/S. Income Tax, 10- Society Ltd., Thapar B,Middleton Row, 3Rd, House, 5Th Floor, 25, Floor, Boaboune Road, Kolkata- Kolkata-71 001 [Pan No.Aaaln 0409 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Araindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Subash Agarwl, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 03-11-2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-12-2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata Dated 23.07.2015. Assessment Was Framed By Ito Ward- 32(2), Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 30.09.2014 For Assessment Year 2012-13. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Per Its Appeal Are As Under:- “1. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Sanction Of The Ao In Holding That The Interest Income Earned By The Assessee-Credit Society Amounting To Rs.40,76,664/- On Account Of Fixed Deposits Does Not Qualify For Deduction U/S 80P.

section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on account of the provision for Ex-gratia. 16. The assessee in the year under consideration has debited a sum of Rs. 1.50 Lacs under the head provision for ex-gratia. However the AO was of the view that the provisions cannot be allowed as deduction. Therefore the same was disallowed

MADHUSUDANKATI SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-49(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 420/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Madhusudankati Samabay Vs. I.T.O.Ward 49(1), Kolkata Krishi Unnayan Samity’ Ltd. Pan : Aaaam 7591 F] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Kakoli Das, Ito For The Respondent : Arvind Agarwal, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 23.06.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 14.07.2017

B)RS.15,78,059/- (c) Hence, I disallow claim of deduction u/s.80P of Rs.15,78,059/-, as above, derived from conducting other activities which does not qualify as deductible income u/s.80(2) (a) (iv) of the IT. Act, 1961. ) 2.3. The assessee submitted before the ld CITA as below:- Ground No. 3 & 4 of the Original Ground:- These two grounds

ITO, WD-35(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KOLKATA RESERVE BANK EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

B” KOLKATA Before Hon’ble Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A. No.1340/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2012-13 V/s. Kolkata Reserve bank I.T.O., Ward-35(3), Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 8t h Employees Co-operative Floor, 110, Credit Society Ltd., 13, Shantiplly,Kolkata-700107. Netaji Subhas Road, RBI Building (Annexe), Kolkata-700001. .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent अपीलाथ

PAHALAMPUR SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD., ,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WARD 23(1), , HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Pahalampur Samabay Krishi Ito, Ward-23(1), Hooghly Unnayan Ltd.

B. Chakraborthy, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal has been filed by the assessee with a delay of 967 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay. The reasons in the application are plausible and valid. Consequently, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose

JALUIDANGA PASCHIM NASARATPUR SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LIMITED,BURDHAMAN vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaassessment Year: 2014-15 Jaluidanga Paschim Ito, Ward-1(1), Burdwan Nasaratpur Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd. Block: Purbasthali 1, Vs. Village: Jaluidanga, Post: Samudragarh, Dist: Purba Bardhaman, 713519. Pan: Aabaj6381R (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri S.D. Bandyopadhyay & Shri A.N. Chatterjee, Fca Respondent By : Shri Nicholas Murmu, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 03.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.04.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Is Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre Dated 21.09.2021 For A.Y. 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:

disallowing certain admissible expenses. The gross total income was disclosed at Rs. 10,77,016/- and the entire amount was claimed as deduction u/s 80P of the Act. The assessee co-operative society had a bank a/c with Axis Bank Ltd, Kalna Branch and earned interest of Rs. 1,16,615/- during the assessment year in question. Since the amount

THE JANAKALYAN COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED ,NORTH 24 PARGANAS vs. ITO, WARD - 11(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, Tax Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2012-13

disallowed assessee’s dividend payable of ₹5592/- in assessment order dated 12.03.2015. The CIT(A)’s order in para-4 has accepted assessee’s grievance qua the same subject to verification. I now come to issue before me. The CIT(A) has held in the lower appellate proceedings that the assessee is a co-operative bank within the meaning

SE, SEC & E RAILWAYS ECCS LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-28, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section 80P for the following reasons given in paragraph no. 6.1 to 6.4 & 7 of his impugned order:- “6.1. I have carefully considered the written submission of the Ld. A/R of the appellant society filed along with Auditor's report during the course of appellate proceedings. I am in agreement with the contention

JALUIDANGA PASCHIM NASARATPUR SAMABY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LIMITED,BARDHAMAN, WEST BENGAL vs. INCOME TAX OPPFICER, WARD-1(3), BURDWAN

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

section 80P(2)(a) and 80P(2)(b) of Income Tax Act 1961. Your appellant society filed income tax return for the Assessment year 2017-18 on20/10/2017 showing total income Nil. 3. The Computation of Total Income as per income tax return submitted are as follows : 3.1. Computation of Income from Business or Profession are as follows : Particulars Details

THE BANK OF TOKYO-MITSUBISHI LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ADIT, INT. TAX., KOLKATA

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

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

section 80P(2)(a) and 80P(2)(b) of Income Tax Act 1961. Your appellant society filed income tax return for the Assessment year 2017-18 on20/10/2017 showing total income Nil. 3. The Computation of Total Income as per income tax return submitted are as follows : 3.1. Computation of Income from Business or Profession are as follows : Particulars Details

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

80P(2)(a)(i) but would also be applicable to all banks/commercial_banks, to which Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applies.[Para 37] ■ From this, Punjab and Haryana High Court pointed out that this circular carves out a distinction between 'stock-in-trade' and 'investment' and provides that if the motive behind purchase and sale of shares is to earn profit, then

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

80P(2)(a)(i) but would also be applicable to all banks/commercial_banks, to which Banking Regulation Act, 1949 applies.[Para 37] ■ From this, Punjab and Haryana High Court pointed out that this circular carves out a distinction between 'stock-in-trade' and 'investment' and provides that if the motive behind purchase and sale of shares is to earn profit, then

M/S PANDITPURSAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-41(1), NADIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sri Manish Borad& Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

Disallowance should be restricted only to the extent of net profit rate i.e. 3.12% of the alleged interest income Page 2 of 8 I.T.A. No.: 04/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. Panditpur Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd. of Rs.23,00,239/- and addition of Rs.71,767/- may only be made. As far as the other additions of Rs.23

ACIT, CIRCLE-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri.N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Sri.Waseem Ahmed Am]

B” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Sri.N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Sri.Waseem Ahmed AM] I.T.A.No.2203Kol/16 Assessment Years : 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Circle-33, Kolkata, -vs.- M/S.Central Bank of India Employees Co-operative Society Ltd. Kolkata 10, Nellie Sengupta Sarani,Kolkata-87 [PAN : AAAAC 3869 N] (Respondent) (Appellant) For the Department : Shri S.Dasgupta, Addl.CIT Sr.DR. For the Assessee :Shri S.Bhatacharjee, FCA & Gautam Banerjee, Advocate

ACIT, CIRCLE-3,ASANSOL, ASANSOL vs. M/S. PURULIA CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., PURULIA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes, while the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80P to the extent of Rs.35,37,804/- for the following reasons given in paragraph nos. 9 & 10 of his impugned order:- I.T.A. No. 1885/KOL./2014 Assessment year: 2005-2006 & C.O. No.102/KOL/2014 (in ITA No. 1885/KOL/2014) Assessment Year: 2005-2006 Page 5 of 9 “9. Before proceeding further the extracts