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.

34 results for “disallowance”+ Section 80P(2)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai393Bangalore260Pune199Chennai137Cochin77Panaji66Delhi58Nagpur54Kolkata52Jaipur49Visakhapatnam42Chandigarh37Ahmedabad36Raipur35Lucknow34Hyderabad34Rajkot24Indore21Surat16Jodhpur12Amritsar9Varanasi6Jabalpur5SC4Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 80P88Deduction31Section 80P(2)(a)27Addition to Income20Natural Justice19Section 143(3)15Section 20115Disallowance14Section 2509Section 271(1)(c)

TINICH SAHKARI GANNA SAMITI LIMITED,BASTII vs. ITO, BASTI

ITA 295/LKW/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma and Shri Amit Kumar, D.Rs
Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

disallowance of expenses of Rs.3508236/- by dismissing the appeal. ITA No.295/LKW/2023 Page 4 of 28 3. Because on the whole facts, circumstances of the case and materials on record, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in denying allowability of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)/ 80P(2)(a) (iii) of the Income tax act 1961, in respect of the assessed

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2

8
Section 1428
Section 80P(2)(d)7

TINICH SAHKARI GANNA SAMITI LIMITED,BASTI vs. ITO, , BASTI

ITA 294/LKW/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma and Shri Amit Kumar, D.Rs
Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

disallowance of expenses of Rs.3508236/- by dismissing the appeal. ITA No.295/LKW/2023 Page 4 of 28 3. Because on the whole facts, circumstances of the case and materials on record, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in denying allowability of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)/ 80P(2)(a) (iii) of the Income tax act 1961, in respect of the assessed

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

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed

ITA 600/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

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

ITA 601/LKW/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

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

ITA 599/LKW/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

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

ITA 260/LKW/2023[2003-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Dec 2025AY 2003-14

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

For Appellant: Shri D. D. Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Neeraj Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 142Section 142(2)(a)Section 153(2)(a)Section 271Section 80PSection 80P(2)

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

ITA 663/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Koushlendra Tiwari, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

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

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

disallowances made by the ld. AO in respect of\nclaim of deduction under section 80P for interest earned by the assessee were upheld\nand the appeals of the assessee were dismissed. The grounds of appeal are as under:-\nITA No.37/Lkw/2022 A.Y. 2017-18\n1. That the Authorities below erred on facts and in law in not allowing\ndeduction u/s 80P

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)

80P(2)(d) of the Act after placing\nreliance on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Surat\nVankar Sahakari Sangh Ltd [72 Taxmann.com 169 (Guj)].\n6.3 The claims made by appellant and reliance placed on above quoted\ndecisions is found to be justified. Therefore, the addition of Rs.\n4,11,20,788/- made

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

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

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 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

ITA 166/LKW/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sh. Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl CIT
Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

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

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.

ITA 165/LKW/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl CIT
Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

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

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

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

ITA 164/LKW/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl CIT
Section 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80P

B’ BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.Y.-2014-15 Co-operative Cane Development The Assistant Commissioner Union Limited, Maholi, Ayyubi vs. of Income Tax, Sitapur (New) Chamber, Raniganj, Lakhimpur Kheri-262001, U.P. PAN:AAATC4152F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sh. Shubham Rastogi, C.A. Revenue by: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl

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

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

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

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