BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

19 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 80P(2)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai204Pune185Chennai156Bangalore120Cochin116Panaji53Kolkata32Ahmedabad29Nagpur25Jaipur25Hyderabad24Visakhapatnam19Lucknow19Delhi14Surat12Rajkot12Chandigarh12Indore11Raipur9Patna4Jabalpur2Guwahati1SC1Amritsar1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 80P62Deduction19Addition to Income11Section 80P(2)(a)10Section 139(1)9Disallowance9Natural Justice9Section 80A8Limitation/Time-bar

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

ITA 371/LKW/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Oct 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Shyam Lal, CA
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

delay of 17 days, which was condoned.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the interest income earned by the cooperative society from investments in cooperative and nationalized banks, made in accordance with statutory provisions (Sections 58 and 59 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act), is attributable to the main activities of the society. Therefore, it is eligible for deduction under Section

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

7
Section 80P(2)(d)6
Section 143(1)6
Condonation of Delay6

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 486/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

2)(a)(iii) of income tax act, 1961. Its total income comes to nil and hence the return for the year total income at nil claiming TDS made under section 194H as commission on receiving has been filed. 8. That the authority below erred on facts and in law in not allowing deduction u/s 80P on interest received on investment

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

ITA 394/LKW/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Apr 2025AY 2016-17
Section 80P

delay was unintentional and caused by the failure of the local counsel to inform\nthe assessee about the passing of the appeal order and the pre-occupation by the\ncounsels at Lucknow with the tax audit and return filing. It was, therefore, prayed\nthat in the interest of justice, the appeal may be admitted. After considering the facts\nas narrated

SHRAMIK VIKAS SAHKARI SHRRAM SAMVIDA SAMITI LTD.,KANPUR vs. AO CIRCLE 1(1)(1), KANPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 356/LKW/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2019-20 Shramik Vikas Sahkari V. The Assessing Officer Shrram Samvida Samiti Ltd, Circle 1(1)(1) 135-K-2, Nankari, Iit Kanpur Kanpur Tan/Pan: (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 25 07 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 08 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 234FSection 80ASection 80P

D E R This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 12.10.2023 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai (hereinafter called “the ld. CIT(A”) in short) for the assessment year 2019-20. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Co- operative Society. The assessee filed

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

ITA 243/LKW/2020[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Apr 2025AY 2014-2015

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

For Appellant: Sh. Jagat Narayan Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl CIT (DR)
Section 14Section 250Section 80P

D E R PER BENCH.: All these appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the orders passed by the ld. CIT(A)-1, Lucknow on various dates under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, partly allowing the appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of ld. ITA Nos.34, 30 & 31/Lkw/2021 AOs at Gonda, Basti and Bahraich

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

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

ITA 34/LKW/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. Jagat Narayan Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl CIT (DR)
Section 14Section 250Section 80P

D E R PER BENCH.: All these appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the orders passed by the ld. CIT(A)-1, Lucknow on various dates under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, partly allowing the appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of ld. ITA Nos.34, 30 & 31/Lkw/2021 AOs at Gonda, Basti and Bahraich

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

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

ITA 247/LKW/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. Jagat Narayan Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl CIT (DR)
Section 14Section 250Section 80P

D E R PER BENCH.: All these appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the orders passed by the ld. CIT(A)-1, Lucknow on various dates under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, partly allowing the appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of ld. ITA Nos.34, 30 & 31/Lkw/2021 AOs at Gonda, Basti and Bahraich

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

ITA 15/LKW/2023[AY 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Apr 2025

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl CIT DR
Section 80P

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 with respect to the interest 6 ITA No.37/LKW/2022, ITA No.15/Lkw/2023 & ITA No.394/ Lkw/2019 M/s Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd. earned on deposits made by it with the banks

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

ITA 37/LKW/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl CIT DR
Section 80P

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 with respect to the interest 6 ITA No.37/LKW/2022, ITA No.15/Lkw/2023 & ITA No.394/ Lkw/2019 M/s Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd. earned on deposits made by it with the banks

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

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 219/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

d) of the Act, interest incomes earned from Banks/Post Offices, other than Co- operative Banks, were taxable and in the instant case, the interests earned by the assessee were not from Co-operative Banks and, therefore, the same were not exempt under section 80P of the Act. The AO, therefore, added the interest income of ITA Nos.218 & 219/LKW/2022 Page

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

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 218/LKW/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

d) of the Act, interest incomes earned from Banks/Post Offices, other than Co- operative Banks, were taxable and in the instant case, the interests earned by the assessee were not from Co-operative Banks and, therefore, the same were not exempt under section 80P of the Act. The AO, therefore, added the interest income of ITA Nos.218 & 219/LKW/2022 Page

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

ITA 196/LKW/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)

D E R This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against order dated 25.11.2024, passed by the National Faceless appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Co- operative Society. The assessee filed its return of income for the year under consideration

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

ITA 348/LKW/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow02 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 253(3)Section 80ASection 80P

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

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

ITA 56/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

D E R This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 26.12.2023, passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee-society filed its return of income in ITR-5, declaring income

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 617/LKW/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI KUL BHARAT (Vice President)

For Appellant: Shri K. R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 29.06.2024 pertaining to the assessment year 2020-21. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - “1. That the Authorities below erred on facts

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

ITA 185/LKW/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Manu Chaurasia, CIT(DR)
Section 119Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80Section 80ASection 80P

D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 07/02/2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [“learned CIT(A)”] for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - “(1). That the Ld. C.I.T. (A), NFAC, erred

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

ITA 840/LKW/2025[2022-23]Status: HeardITAT Lucknow05 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 80P(2)(d)

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

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

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

ITA 618/LKW/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri K. R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 2(19)Section 5Section 80P

D E R This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against order dated 16.08.2024, passed by the Addl/JCIT(A)-5, Mumbai for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the year under consideration in ITR-5 on 21.09.2015, declaring income at Nil and claiming whole

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

ITA 186/LKW/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Mr Shubham Rastogi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Adita Singh [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 253(1)Section 80P(2)

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