CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD.,BAHRAICH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, BAHRAICH

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.599, 600 & 601/Lkw/2025 A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Cooperative Cane Development Vs. Income Tax Officer-1, 423A, Union Ltd., Bahraich, C/O Vaishnavpuram, Huzoorpur Ayyubi Chambers, Raniganj, Road, Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh Lakhimpur Kheri-262701, U.P. 271801 Pan: Aaaac8503F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.01.2026 O R D E R Per Bench These Three Appeals Have Been Filed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac On 25.06.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2013-14) & 26.06.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2018-19) & 4.07.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2020-21), Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Partly Allowed The Appeals Of The Assessee Against The Various Orders Passed By The Ld. Ao Under Section 143(3) For The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Grounds Of Appeal In The Aforesaid Three Appeals Are As Under:- A.Y. 2013-14 “(1) That The Authorities Below Erred On Facts & In Law In Not Allowing Deduction U/S 80P(2)(A)(Iii) & 80P(2)(I) Of I. T. Act On Interest Received On Investments Held With Banks In Form Of F.D.R.'S & Interest On Saving Bank Account Rs. 72,38,730/-. (2) That The Authorities Below Erred On Facts In Not Considering Investments In Deposits With Banks Has Been Made As Per Statutory Requirements & The Interest So Realized On Such Investments Shall Be Attributable To The Activity Of Providing Credit Facilities & Marketing Agriculture Produce. Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd. A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21

B. Account is attributable to the business of providing credit facilities and providing assistance to cane growers for better development cane crops. Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd. A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21 (4) The Ld. C.I.T.(A) erred on facts and in law in not considering that the funds of the Society in form of Share Capital from

CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD.,BAHRAICH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, BAHRAICH

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.599, 600 & 601/Lkw/2025 A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Cooperative Cane Development Vs. Income Tax Officer-1, 423A, Union Ltd., Bahraich, C/O Vaishnavpuram, Huzoorpur Ayyubi Chambers, Raniganj, Road, Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh Lakhimpur Kheri-262701, U.P. 271801 Pan: Aaaac8503F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.01.2026 O R D E R Per Bench These Three Appeals Have Been Filed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac On 25.06.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2013-14) & 26.06.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2018-19) & 4.07.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2020-21), Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Partly Allowed The Appeals Of The Assessee Against The Various Orders Passed By The Ld. Ao Under Section 143(3) For The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Grounds Of Appeal In The Aforesaid Three Appeals Are As Under:- A.Y. 2013-14 “(1) That The Authorities Below Erred On Facts & In Law In Not Allowing Deduction U/S 80P(2)(A)(Iii) & 80P(2)(I) Of I. T. Act On Interest Received On Investments Held With Banks In Form Of F.D.R.'S & Interest On Saving Bank Account Rs. 72,38,730/-. (2) That The Authorities Below Erred On Facts In Not Considering Investments In Deposits With Banks Has Been Made As Per Statutory Requirements & The Interest So Realized On Such Investments Shall Be Attributable To The Activity Of Providing Credit Facilities & Marketing Agriculture Produce. Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd. A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21

B. Account is attributable to the business of providing credit facilities and providing assistance to cane growers for better development cane crops. Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd. A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21 (4) The Ld. C.I.T.(A) erred on facts and in law in not considering that the funds of the Society in form of Share Capital from

CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LTD.,BAHRAICH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, BAHRAICH

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.599, 600 & 601/Lkw/2025 A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Cooperative Cane Development Vs. Income Tax Officer-1, 423A, Union Ltd., Bahraich, C/O Vaishnavpuram, Huzoorpur Ayyubi Chambers, Raniganj, Road, Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh Lakhimpur Kheri-262701, U.P. 271801 Pan: Aaaac8503F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.01.2026 O R D E R Per Bench These Three Appeals Have Been Filed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac On 25.06.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2013-14) & 26.06.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2018-19) & 4.07.2025 (For The Assessment Year 2020-21), Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Partly Allowed The Appeals Of The Assessee Against The Various Orders Passed By The Ld. Ao Under Section 143(3) For The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21. The Grounds Of Appeal In The Aforesaid Three Appeals Are As Under:- A.Y. 2013-14 “(1) That The Authorities Below Erred On Facts & In Law In Not Allowing Deduction U/S 80P(2)(A)(Iii) & 80P(2)(I) Of I. T. Act On Interest Received On Investments Held With Banks In Form Of F.D.R.'S & Interest On Saving Bank Account Rs. 72,38,730/-. (2) That The Authorities Below Erred On Facts In Not Considering Investments In Deposits With Banks Has Been Made As Per Statutory Requirements & The Interest So Realized On Such Investments Shall Be Attributable To The Activity Of Providing Credit Facilities & Marketing Agriculture Produce. Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd. A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21

B. Account is attributable to the business of providing credit facilities and providing assistance to cane growers for better development cane crops. Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd. A.Ys. 2013-14, 2018-19 & 2020-21 (4) The Ld. C.I.T.(A) erred on facts and in law in not considering that the funds of the Society in form of Share Capital from

U.P.COOPERATIVE FEDERATIONLTD,LUCKNOW vs. ITO-2(3), , LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.260/Lkw/2023 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2003-04 U.P. Cooperative Federation V. Income Tax Officer-2(3) Ltd Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Pcf Building, 32, Station Road, 57, Ram Tirath Marg, Lucknow-226004. Hazratganj, Lucknow- 226001. Pan:Aaaau0373P अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant By: Shri D. D. Chopra, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent By: Shri Neeraj Kumar, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22 09 2025 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date Of 19 12 2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / O R D E R

disallowance of deduction u/s 80P of the Act has failed to appreciate that Appellant has been enjoying the benefit of section 80P(2) and the said deduction is not dependent on the quantification of claim made as any addition made to the income specified u/s 80P(2), the corresponding deduction automatically increases too and therefore, such additions create Tax Neutral

SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LIMITED RUPAPUR,HARDOI vs. THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT/NFAC, ACIT, SITAPUR

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

B’ BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.Y. 2018-19 Sahkari Ganna Vikas Samiti vs. The Income Tax Department, Limited Rupapur, Hardoi- National e-Assesmetn Centre, 241001, U.P. Delhi/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Sitapur PAN: AAWFS0887P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.A. Revenue by: Sh. Koushlendra Tiwari, CIT DR Date

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

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

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 119(2)(b) and the decision of the Hon. Madras High Court quoted above the decision relied upon by the appellant is not acceptable, In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the AO CPC has rightly disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80P

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

section 119(2)(b) and the decision of the Hon. Madras High Court quoted above the decision relied upon by the appellant is not acceptable, In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the AO CPC has rightly disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80P

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)

B’BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SH.SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.Y.2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Gonda vs. M/s Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd., Balrampur PAN:AAALC0029P (Appellant) (Respondent) A.Y.2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Gonda vs. M/s Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd., Balrampur PAN:AAALC0029P (Appellant) (Respondent) A.Y.2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Gonda vs. M/s Cooperative Cane Development Union

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)

B’BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SH.SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.Y.2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Gonda vs. M/s Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd., Balrampur PAN:AAALC0029P (Appellant) (Respondent) A.Y.2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Gonda vs. M/s Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd., Balrampur PAN:AAALC0029P (Appellant) (Respondent) A.Y.2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Gonda vs. M/s Cooperative Cane Development Union

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)

B’BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SH.SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.Y.2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Gonda vs. M/s Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd., Balrampur PAN:AAALC0029P (Appellant) (Respondent) A.Y.2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Gonda vs. M/s Cooperative Cane Development Union Ltd., Balrampur PAN:AAALC0029P (Appellant) (Respondent) A.Y.2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Gonda vs. M/s Cooperative Cane Development Union

INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(4), LAKHIMPUR-KHERI vs. M/S KHERI PHILIBHIT SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD., LAKHIMPUR-KHERI

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

disallowed by the Assessing Officer was rightly allowed by learned CIT(A) which may be upheld. 5. Learned D. R., on the other hand, invited our attention to the order of the Assessing Officer and submitted that the Assessing Officer has clearly held that the deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act is not available to the assessee

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

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

disallowed by the Assessing Officer was rightly allowed by learned CIT(A) which may be upheld. 5. Learned D. R., on the other hand, invited our attention to the order of the Assessing Officer and submitted that the Assessing Officer has clearly held that the deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act is not available to the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(5), LAKHIMPUR-KHERI vs. M/S SEHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD, LAKHIMPUR-KHERI

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

disallowed by the Assessing Officer was rightly allowed by learned CIT(A) which may be upheld. 5. Learned D. R., on the other hand, invited our attention to the order of the Assessing Officer and submitted that the Assessing Officer has clearly held that the deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act is not available to the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, LAKHIMPUR-KHERI vs. M/S SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD., LAKHIMPUR-KHERI

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

disallowed by the Assessing Officer was rightly allowed by learned CIT(A) which may be upheld. 5. Learned D. R., on the other hand, invited our attention to the order of the Assessing Officer and submitted that the Assessing Officer has clearly held that the deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act is not available to the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(5), LAKHIMPUR-KHERI vs. M/S SEHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD, LAKHIMPUR-KHERI

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

disallowed by the Assessing Officer was rightly allowed by learned CIT(A) which may be upheld. 5. Learned D. R., on the other hand, invited our attention to the order of the Assessing Officer and submitted that the Assessing Officer has clearly held that the deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act is not available to the assessee

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

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

disallowances made by the ld. AO in respect of claim of deduction under section 80P for interest earned by the assessee were upheld and the appeals of the assessee were dismissed. The grounds of appeal are as under:- ITA No.37/Lkw/2022 A.Y. 2017-18 1. That the Authorities below erred on facts and in law in not allowing deduction u/s 80P

CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LIMITED, MAHOLI, AYYUBI CHAMBER, RANIGANJ, LAKHIMPUR KHERI-262001(U.P),LAKHIMPUR KHERI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SITAPUR (NEW), SITAPUR NEW.

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

2)(d). Furthermore, the ld. Assessing Officer added back an unreported interest income of Rs.4,06,560/- in the assessment year 2020-21 to make the total disallowance under this head as Rs.41,05,832/-. 3. Aggrieved by these additions, the assessee filed appeals in all three years with the ld. CIT(A). However, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed