MAKER TOWER F PREMISES CO-OP SOC. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX - CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

c) ..... (d) in respect of any income by way of interest or dividends derived by the co- operative society from its investments with any other co-operative society, the whole of such income;” 8. Thus, for the purpose of provisions of section 80P(2)(d) of the Act, two conditions are required to be cumulatively satisfied- (i) income

PALM COURT M PREMISES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. ,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT - 30, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

C) No.3 of 2020 judgement dated January 10, 2022 whereby the same would be covered under 2 the Covid Protocol due to pandemic declared by the Hon’ble Supreme Court while determining the period of limitation. 3. Having heard the rival parties and perused the materials on record, we are of the considered view that the assessee’s case would

SHREE MALGANGADEVI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADIT,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 29, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1074/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

section 80P(2)(a)(i) i.e. income of a Co-operative Society as carrying on the business of banking is eligible for deduction. 13. As regards MSEB Commission income Rs. 13.883/- 11 I.T.A. No. 1074/Mum/2019 Shree Malgangadevi Sahkari Patpedhi Maryadit Here we submit that the patpedhi is appointed as MSEB Bill collection center and is receiving commission income as fixed

CIDCO EMPLOYEES CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. WARD 28(1)(3), NAVI MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyalcidco Employees Co-Op. Credit Society, Ground Floor, Cidco Bhavan, Cbd Belapur, Navi Mumbai – 400 614 Pan:Aaaac2203N ..... Appellant Vs. Ito Ward 28(1) (3)/ Nfac Delhi ..... Respondent

c) of sub-section (2), shall be allowed with reference to the income, if any, as referred to in those clauses included in the gross total income as reduced by the deductions under Section 80-HH, Section 80-HHA, Section 80-HHB, Section 80-HHC, Section 80-HHD, Section 80-I, Section 80-IA, Section 80-J and Section

SHRI RENUKAMATA MULTI-STATE CO-OPERATIVE URBAN SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI

2) as well as\nnotice under section 142(1) of the Act along with a detailed questionnaire were\nissued and served on the assessee. On the perusal of the documents found\nduring the course of the search, the AO vide detailed show cause notice dated\n03/12/2019 noted that there is non-compliance in maintaining proper KYC\ndocuments, non-compliance

JCIT (OSD), CC-4(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SHRI RENUKAMATA MULTI-STATE COOPERATIVE URBAN CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., AHAMEDNAGAR

2) as well as\nnotice under section 142(1) of the Act along with a detailed questionnaire were\nissued and served on the assessee. On the perusal of the documents found\nduring the course of the search, the AO vide detailed show cause notice dated\n03/12/2019 noted that there is non-compliance in maintaining proper KYC\ndocuments, non-compliance

M/S RENUKAMATA MULTI STATE CO-OP. URBAN CREDITN SOC. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSTT. CIT, CC-4(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed, while the\nappeal by the Revenue is dismissed

2) as well as\nnotice under section 142(1) of the Act along with a detailed questionnaire were\nissued and served on the assessee. On the perusal of the documents found\nduring the course of the search, the AO vide detailed show cause notice dated\n03/12/2019 noted that there is non-compliance in maintaining proper KҮС\ndocuments, non-compliance

M/S RENUKAMATA MULTI STATE CO-OP. URBAN CREDITN SOC. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSTT. CIT, CC-4(4), MUMBAI

C D Patani Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha (ITA\nNo.727/PUN/2022 dated 28-03-2023.\n(ii) Merchants Credit Co-op Society Ltd vs. ITO (ITA No.329/Bang/2023\ndated 24.08.2023.\n(iii) Saidatar Co-operative Credit Society Ltd vs. ITO (ITA No.1613/M/21\ndated 05-09-2022.\n\n18. However, as evident from the record, the learned CIT(A) by applying the\nreal income

CUFFE PARADE PERSEPOLIS PREMISES CO-OP. SOC. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE PCIT, WARD-17, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

2) of the Act. In the said notice, the deduction claimed by the asssessee under Chapter VI of the Act was directed to be examined by the ld AO. Accordingly, the ld AO issued thereafter notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 20.6.2017 asking for the relevant details :- Question No. 3 – Please file head wise break up of income

CITIZENCREDIT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED (AMBOLI BRANCH),MUMBAI vs. ITO(TDS) 1(1)(4), MUMBAI

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

80P(2)(d) of the Act. Hence, it\nwas obligatory on part of the assessee to deduct tax on the interest income on\nthe fixed or time deposits paid to the concerned Co-op. societies. The AO further\nreferred to provisions of section 194A(1) r.w.s. 194A(3)(i) of the Act and held that\nthese two provisions are specific

MONALISA CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 19(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

c)\n(d) “in respect of any income by way of interest or dividends derived by\nthe co-operative society from its investment with any other co-operative\nsociety, the whole of such income”\n9.1 A reading of the above said provision makes it clear that in the event if\nany Co-operative Society derived income by way of interest

CITIZENCREDIT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED ,(CHEMBUR BRANCH),MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS)1(1)(4), MUMBAI

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

80P(2)(d) of the Act. Hence, it\nwas obligatory on part of the assessee to deduct tax on the interest income on\nthe fixed or time deposits paid to the concerned Co-op. societies. The AO further\nreferred to provisions of section 194A(1) r.w.s. 194A(3)(i) of the Act and held that\nthese two provisions are specific

PRITVI APARTMENTS CO-OP. HSG. SOC. LTD.,MMBAI vs. PR. CIT. CITY-19, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Us, That The Assessee Had Shown Nil Income Under The Head ‘Income From Business’ As Under:- Net Profit As Per Profit & Loss Account (-) 39,46,245 Add: Other Disallowance U/S 36 39,46,245 ------------------ Business Income Nil ------------------

TDS credit available with the assessee. The details of income from other sources are as under:- a)Interest on deposit with ShamraoVithal Co-op Bank Ltd - 1,01,992 b) Interest on deposit with ShamraoVithal Co-op Bank Ltd - 4,69,708 c) Interest on deposit with ShamraoVithal Co-op Bank Ltd - 10,69,640 d) Interest on deposit with

JCIT (OSD), CC-4(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SHRI RENUKAMATA MULTI-STATE COOPERATIVE URBAN CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., AHAMEDNAGAR

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

C D Patani Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha (ITA No.727/PUN/2022 dated 28-03-2023. (ii) Merchants Credit Co-op Society Ltd vs. ITO (ITA No.329/Bang/2023 dated 24.08.2023. (iii) Saidatar Co-operative Credit Society Ltd vs. ITO (ITA No.1613/M/21 dated 05-09-2022. 18. However, as evident from the record, the learned CIT(A) by applying the real income theory made

JCIT (OSD), CC-4(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SHRI RENUKAMATA MULTI-STATE COOPERATIVE URBAN CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., AHAMEDNAGAR

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

C D Patani Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha (ITA No.727/PUN/2022 dated 28-03-2023. (ii) Merchants Credit Co-op Society Ltd vs. ITO (ITA No.329/Bang/2023 dated 24.08.2023. (iii) Saidatar Co-operative Credit Society Ltd vs. ITO (ITA No.1613/M/21 dated 05-09-2022. 18. However, as evident from the record, the learned CIT(A) by applying the real income theory made

THE PANCHRATNA CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -19(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

80P on account of investments and the same was allowed. 3. Further, it was also noticed that from the assessee's computation claimed TDS of Rs. 710,950/- on account of income of Rs. 72,41,011/- received from Loop that the assessee had Mobile (1) Ltd., Tata Teleservices Ltd., "Gem Plaza Jewellery Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd., Goenka Diamond

MHATRE PALACE CHSL,BORIVALI WEST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 42 1 3 MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: SHRI. NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)

TDS. It further held 4 Mhatre Palace CHSL that mere exclusion of Section 80P to co-operative banks by Section 80P(4) of the Act on liability to pay tax does not prevent the assessee from claiming deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act towards the interest income that has been received from a co- operative bank

CITIZENCREDIT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED (BYCULLA BRANCH),MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS)-1(1)(4), MUMBAI

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

80P(2)(d) of the Act. Hence, it\nwas obligatory on part of the assessee to deduct tax on the interest income on\nthe fixed or time deposits paid to the concerned Co-op. societies. The AO further\nreferred to provisions of section 194A(1) r.w.s. 194A(3)(i) of the Act and held that\nthese two provisions are specific