DHANVARSHA NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA LIMITED,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 28(1)(3), NAVI MUMBAI

80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the appellant-Society saying that it is interest earned on surplus fund kept with co-operative banks and not in other Co-operative Societies. 3. Treating the income of Rs.36,52,853/- as income from other sources u/s 56 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 4. CIT(A) has erred

MARIGOLD MERIDIAN CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

4. Failure to Consider Binding Jurisdictional High Court Judgments The CIT(A) erred in ignoring the binding jurisdictional law laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in PCIT v. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. and other decisions holding that interest earned from Co-operative Banks is deductible under Section 80P(2)(d). 5. Incorrect Assumption That Interest

MARIGOLD MERIDIAN CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD-41(2)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

4. Failure to Consider Binding Jurisdictional High Court Judgments The CIT(A) erred in ignoring the binding jurisdictional law laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in PCIT v. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. and other decisions holding that interest earned from Co-operative Banks is deductible under Section 80P(2)(d). 5. Incorrect Assumption That Interest

MARIGOLD MERIDIAN CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD-41(2)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

4. Failure to Consider Binding Jurisdictional High Court Judgments The CIT(A) erred in ignoring the binding jurisdictional law laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in PCIT v. Totagars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. and other decisions holding that interest earned from Co-operative Banks is deductible under Section 80P(2)(d). 5. Incorrect Assumption That Interest

PREMIUM TOWER CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 24(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

section 80P(2)(d) would not apply on the facts of that case. However, as noted above in one of the judgment, the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held the same issue in favour of the assessee. 11. Therefore, following the judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Totagars Cooperative Sale Society

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

TDS to be deducted at the time of payment/credit of interest to the account of the payee, provided other conditions as laid down in the section are satisfied. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the assessee is also entitled to claim deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act on the interest income received on saving accounts

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 ()

4. Grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by the Learned Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-30 is bad in law. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by the Learned Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-30 erred

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

80P(4) of the Act. Further, NBFC shall have the meaning as assigned to it in section 45-I(f) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1935. 25. On the other hand, it is undisputed that the assessee is a co-operative credit society and is a registered Multi-State Co-operative Urban Credit Society established under the Multi

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

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

80P(4) of the Act. Further, NBFC shall have the meaning as assigned to it in section 45-I(f) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1935. 25. On the other hand, it is undisputed that the assessee is a co-operative credit society and is a registered Multi-State Co-operative Urban Credit Society established under the Multi

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

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

80P(4) of the Act. Further, NBFC shall have the meaning as assigned to it in section 45-I(f) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1935. 25. On the other hand, it is undisputed that the assessee is a co-operative credit society and is a registered Multi-State Co-operative Urban Credit Society established under the Multi

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

80P(4) of the Act. Further, NBFC shall have the meaning as assigned to it in section 45-I(f) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1935. 25. On the other hand, it is undisputed that the assessee is a co-operative credit society and is a registered Multi-State Co-operative Urban Credit Society established under the Multi

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

80P(4) of the Act. Further, NBFC shall have the meaning as assigned to it in section 45-I(f) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1935. 25. On the other hand, it is undisputed that the assessee is a co-operative credit society and is a registered Multi-State Co-operative Urban Credit Society established under the Multi

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

4 CIDCO Employees Co-Op. Credit Society investment made in a cooperative bank and commercial bank is not eligible for deduction under section 80P. Resultantly the deduction claims of the Assessee for Rs. 60, 61,597/- was denied and added back to the Assessee’s taxable income. ii) The Ld. Assessing Officer on the issue of payment on account

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

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

ACIT 23(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S THE SALSETTE CATHOLIC CO-OP. HOUSING LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is for the A

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

4,11,47,400, after claiming disallowing of ` 2,46,31,070, under section 80P of the Act. 5. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim for both the years under consideration holding that the deduction is available for investment in other co–operative societies and not other co–operative banks. He was of the view that Co-operative Society

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

4,27,268/- from Bank of India. The deduction of the amount was claimed by the assessee and allowed by the AO u/s 80P of Rs 58,35,966/- of the I. T. Act. As per section 80P(2)(d), the interest income derived from its investments with any other co-operative societies is eligible for deduction. In the Instant

JAI BHAVANI RETI UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANSTHA LTD,VIRAR vs. THANE 4(1), ASHAR IT PARK THANE

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Jai Bhavani Reti Utpadak Sahakari Ito,Ward-4(1), Thane Sanstha Ltd. Vs Ashar It Park, Thane, At Naringi Post Virar, Vasai-Virar, Maharashtra – 400602. Maharashtra – 401201. [Pan No. Aaatj6207E] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

section 80P and not allowing credit of TDS shown in form 26AS. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that he is not pressing ground against not allowing credit of TDS. Therefore, such ground of appeal may be dismissed as not pressed. Considering the plea of ld. AR of the assessee, ground no. 5 which

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

TDS deducted Date of Payment 3 M/s. Cuffe Parade Persepolis Premises Co-operative Society Limited Question No. 7 – Please file complete details of deduction claimed under Chapter VIA with necessary supporting evidences. Question No. 9- Please furnish the copy of assessment orders for the last three assessment years. In this regard you are asked to explain as to why similar