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)

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 by an assessee

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

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 by an assessee

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

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 by an assessee

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

section 80P(4) of the Act. 6.8 Now, the question is confined to single point as Now, the question is confined to single point as to whether the to whether the appellant has derived its interest income from the party falling in the first appellant has derived its interest income from the party falling in the first appellant has derived

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

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

capital from their salaries and does not accept any deposits and or loans from any pension for its transaction and activities. The society was availing overdraft facility against its own deposits from the Bombay Mercantile Co-operative Bank Ltd. and paid interest on the same. The assessee by virtue of letter dated 21.11.2012 also stated that the society was eligible

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)

capital from their salaries and does not accept any deposits and or loans from any pension for its transaction and activities. The society was availing overdraft facility against its own deposits from the Bombay Mercantile Co-operative Bank Ltd. and paid interest on the same. The assessee by virtue of letter dated 21.11.2012 also stated that the society was eligible

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

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

C ourt followed the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of same asses see which was later on followed by this Court in the case of State Bank of India Vs . CIT, reported in MANU/GJ/1053/2016 : (2016) 389 ITR 578 (Guj), relevant par as are reproduced as under : "16. In case where the co-operative society

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)

80P. Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies. (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

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)

80P. Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies. (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

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)

80P. Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies. (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

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)

C. Kanojiya, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 21.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 19.12.2024 O R D E R Per Beena Pillai, JM: Present appeal is filed by the assessee against order passed by Ld.PCIT-20 Mumbai u/s. 260 of the act for A.Y. 2017-18 on following grounds of appeal: 1. “Deduction u/s. 80P (2)(a)(i) shall be allowed being

ADARSH SEVA SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. We have considered the submission of both sides and perused the material available on record. In the present case, the business of the assessee is to provide credit facilities to its members. The assessee collects/accepts/raise funds in the form of share capital, deposit

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

gains attributable to such activities as does not exceed, — (i) Where such cooperative society is a consumers’ cooperative society, [one hundred thousand rupees]; and (ii) In any other case, [fifty thousand rupees]. 8 CIDCO Employees Co-Op. Credit Society Explanation. —in this clause, “consumers’ cooperative society” means a society for the benefit of the consumers. (d) in respect

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

c)\nAs per clause 5 of the bye-laws, nominal members must pay a fee of Rs.\n100 but most importantly the nominal members would not be allowed to\nsubscribe to the share capital of the assessee, are not eligible to\ntake/have any interest in the management of the society, are not eligible\nto vote or contest in any election

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

c) As per clause 5 of the bye-laws, nominal members must pay a fee of Rs.\n100 but most importantly the nominal members would not be allowed to\nsubscribe to the share capital of the assessee, are not eligible to\ntake/have any interest in the management of the society, are not eligible\nto vote or contest in any election

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

c)\nAs per clause 5 of the bye-laws, nominal members must pay a fee of Rs.\n100 but most importantly the nominal members would not be allowed to\nsubscribe to the share capital of the assessee, are not eligible to\ntake/have any interest in the management of the society, are not eligible\nto vote or contest in any election

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

c)\nAs per clause 5 of the bye-laws, nominal members must pay a fee of Rs.\n100 but most importantly the nominal members would not be allowed to\nsubscribe to the share capital of the assessee, are not eligible to\ntake/have any interest in the management of the society, are not eligible\nto vote or contest in any election