ITO-26(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANGLI VAIBHAV CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

b)………………………………………………………………. (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” Thus, from a perusal of the aforesaid Sec. 80P(2)(d) it can safely be gathered that income by way of interest income derived

ITO-26(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANGLI VAIBHAV CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

b)………………………………………………………………. (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” Thus, from a perusal of the aforesaid Sec. 80P(2)(d) it can safely be gathered that income by way of interest income derived

ITO-26(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANGLI VAIBHAV CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

b)………………………………………………………………. (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” Thus, from a perusal of the aforesaid Sec. 80P(2)(d) it can safely be gathered that income by way of interest income derived

SADHANA SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LIMITED,PALGHAR vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

b)………………………………………………………………. (Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2020-2021) (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” Thus, from a perusal of the aforesaid Sec. 80P(2)(d) it can safely be gathered that income

SANGAM NAGARI SAHAKRI PATPEDHI MARYADIT,NAVIMUMBAI vs. MUM-W-91-RANGE-222, NAVIMUMBAI

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed

capital, if not immediately required to be lent to the members, they cannot keep the said amount idle. If they deposit this amount in bank so as to earn interest, the said interest income is attributable to the profits and gains of the business of providing credit facilities to its members only. The society is not carrying on any separate

SANGAM SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADITNAGARI,NAVI MUMBAI, THANE vs. MUMBAI-W-91, VASHI NAVIMUMBAI

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 Sangam Sahakari Patpedhi Mumbai-W-91, Maryaditnagari, Navi Mumbai, It-Office, Vashi Railway Station Office No. 227, Central Facility Vs. Building Navi Mumbai-400703. Building, 3Rd Floor, Sector-19, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai-400705. Pan No. Aacas 6296 B Appellant Respondent

B Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Vijay Kumar Shinde Revenue by : Ms. Kakoli Ghosh, Sr. DR : Date of Hearing 31/01/2024 Date of pronouncement : 31/01/2024 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM These appeals by the assessee are directed against two separate orders both dated 31.07.2023, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short

THE SARVODAY CO.OP. CREDIT SOC. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD- 26(3)(6) NOW ASSESSED WITH ITO, WD 26(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Sarvoday Co-Operative Credit Income Tax Officer, Society Ltd., Ward 26(3)(6), 19, Shiv Shopping Centre, Shivaji Vs. 315, 3Rd Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, Talao, Sardar Pratap Singh Marg, C-41 To C-43, G Block, Bkc, Bhandup (W), Bandra (E), Mumbai-400078. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaaat 9173 A Appellant Respondent

b deposits kept with co deposits kept with co-op. banks, holding that a co- -op bank is not a co-op society. Your appellant, therefore, prays in the alternative, op society. Your appellant, therefore, prays in the alternative, op society. Your appellant, therefore, prays in the alternative, and without prejudice to the prayer made in Ground No.1 above

BOMBAY MERCANTILE CO-OP BANK LTD EMPLOYEES CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO-17(1)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

B” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & Bombay Mercantile Co-op. Bank Ltd. Employees Co-op. Credit Society Ltd. Navratan, 69, P. D’Mello Road, Carnac Bunder Mumbai – 400009.Maharashtra. [PAN:AAAJB0706E] …………. Appellant Income Tax Officer - 17(1)(3), Mumbai Vs Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai – 400051. Maharashtra …………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee

BOMBAY MERCANTILE CO-OP BANK LTD EMPOYEES CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO-17(1)(3), MUMBAI

B” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & Bombay Mercantile Co-op. Bank Ltd. Employees Co-op. Credit Society Ltd. Navratan, 69, P. D’Mello Road, Carnac Bunder Mumbai – 400009.Maharashtra. [PAN:AAAJB0706E] …………. Appellant Income Tax Officer - 17(1)(3), Mumbai Vs Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai – 400051. Maharashtra …………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee

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

In the result, the assessee‟s appeal ITA NO

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

b) of the BR Act must be borne in mind as opposed to providing credit facilities to its members. 15.2 Section 80P was inserted to the Act with effect from 01.04.1968, however, sub- section (4) was reinserted with effect from 01.04.2007, in the present form. Earlier sub-section (4) was omitted with effect from 01.04.1970. Sub-section (4) of Section

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

In the result, the assessee‟s appeal ITA NO

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

b) of the BR Act must be borne in mind as opposed to providing credit facilities to its members. 15.2 Section 80P was inserted to the Act with effect from 01.04.1968, however, sub- section (4) was reinserted with effect from 01.04.2007, in the present form. Earlier sub-section (4) was omitted with effect from 01.04.1970. Sub-section (4) of Section

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

In the result, the assessee‟s appeal ITA NO

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

b) of the BR Act must be borne in mind as opposed to providing credit facilities to its members. 15.2 Section 80P was inserted to the Act with effect from 01.04.1968, however, sub- section (4) was reinserted with effect from 01.04.2007, in the present form. Earlier sub-section (4) was omitted with effect from 01.04.1970. Sub-section (4) of Section

SADHANA SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LIMITED,PALGHAR vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

b efore the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka (Dharwad Bench) in the case of Princi pal Commissioner of Income Tax and ors. Vs. Totagars co-operative sale Society, reported in (2017) 395 ITR 611(KAR). The substantial questions of law which aro se for consideration as recorded in Para1 are reproduced as under: "(I) Whether the assessee, Totagar

ITO 15(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. SHIVRAJ SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT, MUMBAI

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amarjit Singhिनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./5268/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Income Tax Officer-15(2)(4) M/S. Shivraj Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit Matru Mandir, Room No.111, Grant S.S. Sanstha Maryadit, Omkar Chs, Bldg. Road(W) Vs. No.32/934, Pant Nagar, Ghatkopar (E) Mumbai-400 007. Mumbai. Pan:Aaajs 2751 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Dr. A.K. Nayak-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: None सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/03/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 31.03.2017 लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार /Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 16/06/2014 Of The Cit (A)-26, Mumbai, The Assessing Officer (Ao) Has Filed The Present Appeal. Assessee, An Aop, Filed Its Return Of Income On 13/09/2010, Declaring Total Income At Rs. Nil, After Claiming Deduction U/S. 80P Of The Act, Amounting Rs. 44.50 Lakhs. The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S. 143 (3) Of The Act, On 28/03/2013, Determining Its Income At Rs. 44, 50, 811/-

capital of Rs. 95.70 lakhs, statutory reserves of Rs. 90.33 lakhs deposits of Rs.838.65 lakhs from members and other liabilities, that on the asset side it had balances with various scheduled and co-operative banks, investments in fixed deposits maintained with Co- Operative Banks and loan/advances, that it had received interest on loans of Rs. 1 59.85 lakhs (including penalty

BOMBAY CITY POSTAL CLERKS CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE PR. CIT-20, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: SMT BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

capital in an excess of rupees one lakh. It has been the Bombay City Postal Clearks Co.op. Credit Society Ltd. ;A. Y.2017-18 appellant's contention that the conditions No. (1) and (3) provided above are not satisfied. 10. Therefore the issue that arises for consideration is whether the appellant satisfies condition No.(1) and (3) above. The impugned order after

MAHIM VIVIDH KARYAKARI SAHAKARI SOCIETY LTD.,,THANE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, THANE

In the result we allow the ground no

b) of section 80P (2) of the Act would not apply in the facts and circumstances of the present care. The person or body corporate from which such interest income is received will not change its character, viz. interest income not arising from its business operation which made it ineligible. Co-operative societies and co-operative banks are given different

SANJAY CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,THANE vs. THE PR. COMM OF INCOME TAX 1, THANE

In the result we allow the ground no

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalsanjay Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., Sanjay Society Building, Uttam Naka, Bhayander, Thane-401106. Pan: Aacas3872P ...... Appellant Vs. Pcit-1, Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, Road No. 16Z, Wagle Indl. Estate, Thane-400604. ..... Respondent Appellant/Assessee By : Dr. Ravindra Nagesh Naik, Ca Respondent/Revenue By : Sh. Kailash Kanojia- Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/12/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 19061 [For Short ‘The Act’] Vide Order Dated 17.03.2022 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Ld. Pcit-1, Thane Erred In Law & On Facts In Not Appreciating That All The Details/ Information Relating To Interest Income Were Submitted During The Scrutiny

b) of section 80P (2) of the Act would not apply in the facts and circumstances of the present care. The person or body corporate from which such interest income is received will not change its character, viz. interest income not arising from its business operation which made it ineligible. Co-operative societies and co-operative banks are given different

TUPURWADI CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 21(3)(4), MUMBAI

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

80P : (1) Where, in the case of an assessee being a co-operative society, the gross total income includes any income referred to in sub-section (2), there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section, the sums specified in sub-section (2), in computing the total income of the assessee. (2) The sums

ITO 21(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. MTNL MUMBAI EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

gains attributable to the activities of providing credit facilities to its members . 4.3.1 For coming to the above conclusion, reliance is placed on the following decisions . . ij Order of CIT(Appeals)-33 Mumbai in appellant's own case for AY2013-14 dated 17.04.2018 wherein the addition made by the AO on account of . disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2jfaj