ITO, WD-36(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD., KOLKATA

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

section 80P(2) of the Act. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 11. The Hon’ble Kolkata Bench in the case of the Baksara Co-op. Credit Society Ltd held as under:- “12. Keeping in view the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgar's Cooperative Sale Society Limited (supra) cited

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

section 80P(1), 80P(2) and 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the A.O. on profit from the business of Holiday Homes on the decision of some other case laws which

RAJYADHARPARA CHANDPUR SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LIMITED,PURBA BARDHAMAN vs. ITO, WARD - 2(4), BURDWAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member)

68,61,964 - Rs. 21, 46,2807- 47,15,684) Less : Deduction under chapter -VI NIL (as discussed above no deduction is eligible u/s 80P) Total Income 21,46,280/- 9. The Learned Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Burdwan denied to allow the deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act 1961 of the amount of interest

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

80P of the 29,58,419.00 Income Tax Act, 1961 Total income NIL 4. The return was selected for scrutiny through computer assisted scrutiny system (CASS) The Learned come Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) Burdwan added the disallowable expenditures and provisions which has already been added by your appellant, in order to find out the Profits and gains of business

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)

80P of the 29,58,419.00 Income Tax Act, 1961 Total income NIL 4. The return was selected for scrutiny through computer assisted scrutiny system (CASS) The Learned come Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) Burdwan added the disallowable expenditures and provisions which has already been added by your appellant, in order to find out the Profits and gains of business

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.

D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Pahalampur Samabay Krishi ITO, Ward-23(1), Hooghly Unnayan Ltd. C/o S. N. Ghosh & Associates, Vs Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kol – 700001. (PAN: AAAAP2517N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate Respondent

ITO, WD-32(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BOKARO STEEL EMPLOYEE'S CALCUTTA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, for statistical purpose, the appeal of Revenue is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2012-13

d) of the Act. Thus, the amount of income for Rs.36,88,150/- is not eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act and liable to be Taxed u/s 56 of the Act as income from “other sources”. Accordingly, the addition was made by the AO in the hands of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved assessee preferred

SRIDHARPUR CO-OPERATIVE BANK,BARDHAMAN vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D for any previous year, the assessee shall pay by way of penalty, in addition to tax payable under section 115BBE, a sum computed at the rate of ten per cent of the tax payable under clause (i) of sub-section

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

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

D E R Per Shri P.M. Jagtap, A.M..: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata dated 14.01.2015. 2. The first issue involved in this appeal as raised in Grounds No. 1 & 2 relates to the disallowance of Rs.57,87,272/- made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed

THE W.B. STATE CO-OP AGRI AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 32, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2006-07

D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)” passed u/s 250 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) vide Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1057593476

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 32 KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. BONGAON CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, BONGAON WEST BENGAL

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: the Assessing Officer and hence it was rightly treated as Unexplained Cash Credit.

80P(2)(d) of the Act. 1.2 Aggrieved with the action of the Ld. CIT(A) the Department is in appeal through the following grounds: “1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the fact that as per RBI Notification in RBI/2016-17/130 DCM (Pig) No. 1273/10.27.00/2016-17 dated 14/11/2016, deposit of SBN (specified bank notes) to District Central

BONGAON CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,BONGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 32,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2022-23 Bongaon Cooperative Credit Society Ltd..…………….……….……….……Appellant First Floor, Banerjee Market Jessore Road, Bongaon, Dist: North 24 Parganas, W.B - 743235.. [Pan: Aaaab6325N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-32, Kolkata….…………...…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: S. Ghosh, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Ruchika Sharma, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 04, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 18, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.05.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 28.08.2022 Declaring Nil Income After Claiming Deduction U/S 80P Of The Act Of Rs.25,75,431.98/- . The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass. The Assessment Was Completed Vide Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Dated 15.03.2024 Determining Total Income At Rs.71,81,740/- By Disallowing Deduction U/S 80P Of The Act With Regard To The Interest Income Received From Banks. Bongaon Cooperative Credit Society Ltd 3. Aggrieved By The Said Order, The Assessee Preferred Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) Wherein The Appeal Of The Assessee Has Been Dismissed.

2)(d). 5. Contrary to that, the ld. DR supports the impugned order. 6. Upon hearing the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties, we have perused the records. We find that the Assessing Officer denied exemption of Rs.58,83,164/- u/s 80P on account of interest income received. We note that in the assessee’s own case

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

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XIX, Kolkata dated 07.04.2014 and the solitary issue involved therein relates to the disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80P in respect of interest income earned on Fixed Deposits (General). 2. The assessee

JAGANNATH KARBARH DESHAPRAN SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD.,EGRA, PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. I.T.O., WARD - 27(4), HALDIA, HALDIA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 667/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jagannath Karbarh Deshapran Skus Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Jagannath Karbarh Ward-27(4), Haldia Vs Pirijkhanbarh Egra Purba Medinipur -721422 [Pan : Aacaj0089M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/05/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 22/09/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Revised Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Action Of The A.O. (Cpc) In Denying Deduction U/S Section 80P To The Tune Of Rs. 15,31,190/- For Belated Filing Of The Return Of Income. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Considered That The Reason For Belated Filing Of Return Of Income Was Beyond The Control Of The Society. 3. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Considered That The Issue Was Debatable & The Adjustment U/S 143(1) Was Not Permissible In Law.” 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Received An Intimation From Cpc, Bangalore U/S 143(1) Of The Act Making An Adjustment In Returned Income By Which Cpc Did Not Grant Deduction U/S 80P Of The Act At Rs. 15,31,190/- Claimed

D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”) dated 22/09/2022, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act’), for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The assessee has raised the following revised

KISHOREPUR PASCHIMANCHAL S K U S LIMITED,HOOGHLY vs. I.T.O., WARD - 23(1), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 716/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Kishorepur Paschimanchal Skus Limited Income Tax Officer, Bandipur, Malay Bandipur Ward-23(1), Hooghly Vs B.O. Bandipur Hooghly - 712617 [Pan : Aacak9370Q] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/05/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 13/10/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Revised Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Denial Of Benefit Of Section 80P To The Tune Of Rs. 6,32,082/- By A.O. (Cpc) On The Ground Of Belated Filing Of Return Of Income. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Appreciated That The Delay In Filing Of Return Of Income Was Occasioned Due To Reasons Beyond The Control Of The Assessee. 3. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Appreciated That The Denial Of Benefit U/S 80P On Account Of Delay In Filing Return Of Income Was Beyond The Jurisdiction Of The A.O. (Cpc) While Exercising Power Of Processing Return Of Income U/S 143(1).” 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Received An Intimation From Cpc, Bangalore U/S 143(1) Of The Act Making An Adjustment In Returned Income By Which Cpc Did Not Grant Deduction U/S 80P Of The Act At Rs. 6,32,082/- Claimed By

D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”) dated 13/10/2022, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act’), for Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The assessee has raised the following revised

MUNDUKHOLA BAKSAGARH SKUS LTD.,HOOGLY vs. ITO, WARD-24, HOOGHLY

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed and that of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward-24 Mundukhola Baksagarh Skus Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, G.T. Road, Baksararh, Panchpara, Hoogly, Khadinamore, Chinsurah, Vs. West Bengal-712501 Hooghly, West Benga 712101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabam7385E Assessee By : Shri Saumitra Choudhury, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sailen Samadder, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.01.2025

D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 16.03.2024 for the AY 2017-18. 02. The ground no.1 is general in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. 03. The issue raised

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

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

BURDWAN SATGACHIA JANAKALYAN SOCIETY,,MEMARI, BURDWAN vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(1),, BURDWAN

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Burdwan Satgachia Janakalyan Ito Ward 1(1) Society, Aaykar Bhawan, Court Satgachia, Memari, Burdwan, Compound, Burdwan, Vs. West Bengal-713422 West Bengal-713101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaab8302K Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.12.2025

D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 16.12.2024 for the AY 2012-13. 2. At the outset, we note that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 172 days

NANDAN LIVE STOCK DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,BURDWAN vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 1,, DURGAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2057/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Nandan Live Stock Development Cooperative Society Limited,………………………….……..……Appellant C/O. Jain Vinod K & Associates, 41A, A.J.C. Bose Road, Diamond Prestige Nirman, 6Th Floor, Suite No. 613, Kolkata-700017 [Pan:Aaaan5417B] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,...Respondent Circle-1, Durgapur, Aayakar Bhawan, City Centre, Durgapur-734101, West Bengal Appearances By: Shri Vinod Jain, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Ms. Madhumita Das, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: February 24, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 06, 2025 O R D E R

D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 6th August, 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2017-18. 1 Nandan Live Stock Development Cooperative Society Limited 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee-Society is engaged