M/S CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD.,LAKHIMPUR-KHERI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-I, LAKHIMPUR -KHERI

In the result, all three appeals are partly allowed

section 80P so as\nto include income from sources other than the actual conduct of the Business of\nthe Society and thus Interest Income on FDR's & S. B. A/c is attributable to the\nbusiness of providing credit facilities and marketing the agriculture produce of\nmembers.\nWITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE\n5. The Ld. C.I.T.(A) erred on facts

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GONDA vs. M/S. CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, BALRAMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: SH.SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

section 80P in respect of such gross receipts from sugar mills, especially without giving finding of fact that such receipts were duly earned as business receipts. 3. That the appellant also craves to modify amend, change and revise the above grounds of appeal and add further grounds of appeal, if necessary.” 2. As all these appeals are on a common

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GONDA vs. M/S COOPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD, BALRAMPUR, BALRAMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: SH.SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

section 80P in respect of such gross receipts from sugar mills, especially without giving finding of fact that such receipts were duly earned as business receipts. 3. That the appellant also craves to modify amend, change and revise the above grounds of appeal and add further grounds of appeal, if necessary.” 2. As all these appeals are on a common

INCOME TAX OFFICER, GONDA vs. M/S. CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, BALRAMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: SH.SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

section 80P in respect of such gross receipts from sugar mills, especially without giving finding of fact that such receipts were duly earned as business receipts. 3. That the appellant also craves to modify amend, change and revise the above grounds of appeal and add further grounds of appeal, if necessary.” 2. As all these appeals are on a common

SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD VIKRAMJOT BASTI,VIKRAMJOT vs. INOCME TAX OFFICER BASTI -NEW, INCOME TAX OFFICE BASTI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Sahkari Ganna Vikas V. The Income Tax Officer Samiti Ltd. Basti Vikramjot, Basti (U.P) Tan/Pan:Aabas4611B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.12.2024, Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-3, Bengaluru For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Co- Operative Society Registered Under The Co-Operative Societies Act, 1912. The Main Activity Of The Assessee Was Marketing Of Sugar Cane Grown By The Cane Growers, Who Were Members Of The Assessee-Society. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 21.03.2018, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,73,170/-. During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee-Society Had Received Commission From Sugar Mills On Supply Of Sugar Cane Of Rs.70,16,032/-, Which Was Claimed As Exempt In Terms Of Section 80P(2)(A)(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act

condone the delay in filing of the appeal and admit the appeal for hearing. 6.0 None was present for the assessee when the appeal was called out for hearing nor was any adjournment application moved in this regard. However, looking into the facts of the case, I proceed to adjudicate the appeal ex-parte qua the assessee

ACIT CIRLCE-1, LUCKNOW vs. U P COOPERATIVE SUGAR FACTORIES FEDERATION LIMITED, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed\nfor statistical purposes

Section 80P on interest income earned from a cooperative bank. The Assessing Officer had disallowed this deduction, treating the interest income as 'income from other sources'. The appeal was filed with a delay of 17 days, which was condoned

SAHAKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD,,BAGHAULI, HARDOI vs. THE ITO, RANGE-3(2), HARDOI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava

condone the delay in filing of the appeals and admit the appeals for hearing. 6.0 The Ld. A.R. submitted that in both the appeals, the AO has disallowed assessee’s claim under section 80P

SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD. ,BAGHAULI, HARDOI vs. THE ITO RANGE-3(3), HARDOI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava

condone the delay in filing of the appeals and admit the appeals for hearing. 6.0 The Ld. A.R. submitted that in both the appeals, the AO has disallowed assessee’s claim under section 80P

CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNIAN, LTD. ,LAKHIPUR KHERI vs. ITO WARD-3(4), LAKHIPUR-1

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

section 253(3) of the I. T. Act, the delay in filing of the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted. (C) In this case the return filed by the assessee was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and an intimation dated 29/10/2020 was issued to the assessee by Revenue denying the deduction claimed u/s 80P

M/S CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD,LAKHIMPUR KHERI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -1, RANGE-3(4), LAKHIMPUR KHERI

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. The facts of the case in all the three assessment orders are similar. The assessee had claimed deduction under section 80P

M/S CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION GOLA,LAKHIMPUR KHERI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER RANGE-3(4), LAKHIMPUR KHERI-1

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. The facts of the case in all the three assessment orders are similar. The assessee had claimed deduction under section 80P

HARDOI DISTRICT CANE GROWERS CO-*OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,LAKHIMPUR KHERI vs. ITO-3(2),, HARDOI-1

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

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2018-19 Hardoi District Cane Growers V. The Ito 3(2) Co-Operative Society Ltd. Hardoi Ayyubi Chamber, Raniganj Lakhimpur Kheri Tan/Pan:Aabah4032R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 23 07 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 08 2024 O R D E R

section 80P(2)(a)(iii) of the Act at Rs.34,50,823/-. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC. However, the appeal before the NFAC came to be dismissed on account of the fact that there was a delay of 40 days in filing of appeal before the NFAC and no application for condonation

DISTRICT CO-OPERTIVE SUGAR CANE SUPPLY LTD. ,BAREILLY vs. ITO RANGE-1-1 , BAREILLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI KUL BHARAT (Vice President)

section 80P so as to include income from sources other than the actual conduct of the Business of the Society and thus Interest Income on FDR’s & S. B. A/c is attributable to the business of providing credit facilities and providing assistance to cane growers for better development cane crops. 5. The Ld. C.1.T.(A) erred on facts

DARYABAD CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LIMITED,BARABANKI vs. THE ADDL./JOINT/DEPUTY/ACIT, NFAC

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

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2014-15 Daryabad Co-Operative Cane V. The Addl/Joint/Dy. Acit Development Union Limited Nfac Daryabad, Ram Sanehi Ghat Delhi Barabanki Tan/Pan:Aaaad4943N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 23 04 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 24 04 2025 O R D E R

80P(2) (c) of the Act, 1961 and added the same to the income of the assessee. 2.3 The AO also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, separately. 3. Aggrieved, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC, which dismissed the appeal of the assessee for the reason of there being a delay

CO-OP-CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION GOLA,LAKHIMPUR KHERI vs. ITO RANGE-3(4), LAKHIMPUR KHERI-1

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriaco-Op Cane Development The Income Tax Officer, V. Union Gola Range-3(4) C/O Ayyubi Chamber, Raniganj, Lakhimpur Kheri-262701. Lakhimpur Kheri-262701, Up. Pan:Aaaac1960A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Manu Chaurasia, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 15 10 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 24 10 2024 O R D E R

80P rws 80AC, ‘the only remedy available lies in the machinery provisions of the Act rather seeking legal remedy. Such provisions are found in section 119(2)(b) which ‘enables an assessee to approach the Board for seeking relief in such cases. The provisions of section 119%2)(b) are reproduced below: Section 119: “Instructions to subordinate authorities

MANTRI GANNA VIKAS PARISHAD PARSENDI,BAHRAICH vs. ITO-1, BAHRAICH

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

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2014-15 Mantri Ganna Vikas Parishad V. The Income Tax Officer-1 Parsendi, Bahraich Bahraich C/O Ayyubi Chambers Raniganj, Lakhimpur Kheri Tan/Pan:Aaalm1622L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri K. R. Rastogi, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18 03 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19 03 2025 O R D E R

80P of the Act is not allowable. The AO held that the assessee had suppressed its net assets by showing its bank balance at low and that it was clear that the assessee had produced inaccurate particulars in its final accounts and, therefore, the books of account of the assessee were rejected. The AO, accordingly, did not accept the expenses

BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,KANPUR vs. ITO, CIVIL LINES

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

80P(2)(d) of the I. T. Act. The assessee filed appeal in the office of the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal on limitation ground without going into merits of the case. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the aforesaid order of the learned

M/S CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL CHILWARIA, BRH, C/O AYYUBI CHAMBER , RANIGANJ, LAKHIMPUR KHERI-262802,LAKHIMPUR KHERI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, BAHRAICH

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 186/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Cane Development Council Chilwaria, Brh C/O. Ayyubi Chamber, Raniganj, Lakhimpur Kheri, Up-262802. Pan: Aaatc6087H . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

delay in instituting the present appeal, in the larger interest of justice and after placing reliance on ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr.’ [2017 ITAT-Lucknow Page 2 of 5 Cane Development Council Chilwaria, BRH Vs ITO ITA No.186/LKW/2023 AY: 2014-15 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs Ms Katiji