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

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

capital and its normal business is to deal in money a nd credit. The business of such a bank does not consist only of receiving deposits and lending money to its members or such other societies as are mentioned in the objects. When such a society lends out its monies so that they may be readily avail able to meet

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)

gains of business’. Our view draws strength from the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Premises Co-operative Society Ltd. vs. ITO: ITA No. 6547/Mum/2017, dated 24.04.2018. In that case, after examining the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Cooperative Sale Society

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)

gains of business’. Our view draws strength from the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Premises Co-operative Society Ltd. vs. ITO: ITA No. 6547/Mum/2017, dated 24.04.2018. In that case, after examining the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Cooperative Sale Society

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

gains of business’. Our view draws strength from the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Premises Co-operative Society Ltd. vs. ITO: ITA No. 6547/Mum/2017, dated 24.04.2018. In that case, after examining the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Cooperative Sale Society

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

gains of business’. Our view draws strength from the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Premises Co-operative Society Ltd. vs. ITO: ITA No. 6547/Mum/2017, dated 24.04.2018. In that case, after examining the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Cooperative Sale Society

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)

gains of business’. Our view draws strength from the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kaliandas Udyog Bhavan Premises Co-operative Society Ltd. vs. ITO: ITA No. 6547/Mum/2017, dated 24.04.2018. In that case, after examining the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Cooperative Sale Society

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

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

section 80P(4) of the Act.\n6.8 Now, the question is confined to single point as to whether the appellant has derived its interest income from the party falling in the first bracket or in the second bracket or both. If the interest income has been earned from any co-operative society having a banking license or from any commercial

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

d), albeit on different reasoning. I confirm the disallowance of deduction for the reasons discussed above. Ground the disallowance of deduction for the reasons discussed above. Ground the disallowance of deduction for the reasons discussed above. Ground No 1 and 2 are No 1 and 2 are therefore dismissed. Ground No 3 is with regard to therefore dismissed. Ground

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

d) of sec. 80P (2) of the Act would not apply in the facts and circumstances of the present case. The Karnataka High Court has discussed the provisions of section BOP as a whole and held that it is a character and nature of income which determines the taxability or exemption from taxability. In these cases, the surplus fund which

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

In the result we allow the ground no

d) of sec. 80P (2) of the Act would not apply in the facts and circumstances of the present case. The Karnataka High Court has discussed the provisions of section BOP as a whole and held that it is a character and nature of income which determines the taxability or exemption from taxability. In these cases the surplus fund which

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

d) nor u/s 80P(2)(a)(i). Therefore, the interest amount of Rs 35,21,707/ Therefore, the interest amount of Rs 35,21,707/- received from received from Co op Bank is disallowed and added back to the total income of op Bank is disallowed and added back to the total income of op Bank is disallowed and added

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

MAHAPALIKA KSHETRA MADHYAMIK SHIKSHAK SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 21(2)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodita No.4582/Mum/2017 (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Mahapalika Kshetra Madhyamik Shikshak Ito 21(2)(2), Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit Room No. 111, 1St Floor, 201/202, Anish Tower, Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Bapat Marg, Matunga West, Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400 016

section were not to apply in relation to any co-operative bank other than a “primary agricultural credit society” or “a primary agricultural and rural development bank”. As is discernible from a perusal of Sec. 80P(2)(a)(i), the same envisages a deduction in respect of the whole of the amount of profits and gains of business “attributable

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 MERCANTILE CO. OP. BANK LTD. EMPLOYEES CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 15(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.3583/Mum/2014 & 4824/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years:2010-11 & 2012-13) Bombay Mercantile Co-Op. बिधम/ Ito-15(1)(2) Bank Ltd. Room No.116, 1St Floor, Vs. Employees Co-Op. Credit Matru Mandir, Grant Road, Society Ltd. Mumbai-400007. Navratan Building, 69, P. D’Mello Road, Carnac Bunder, Mumbai-400009. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaajb0706E (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vijay Joshi Revenue By: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/09/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/10/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -26 & 28, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2012-13. Ita. No.3583/Mum/2014 2. The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 24.02.2014 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -26, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010- 11. Ita Nos. 3583/M/2014 & 4824/M/2016 A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2012-13 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

d) but is exempt u/s 80P(2)(i) of the Act. The case law of Totgar’s Cooperative Society was rightly distinguished by Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, keeping in view all facts and circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the order of Ld. CIT(A). 10. In view of above, appeal filed by revenue is dismissed

SHUBHAM NAGRI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,MUMBAI vs. PR.CIT-29, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2013-14 is dismissed and appeal for the AY 2014-15 is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Shubham Nagri Sahakari The Income Tax Officer- Patsanstha Maryadit, 29(3)(4), 997, 2/2, Aadarsh Housing Room No. 308, 3Rd Floor, Society, Parksite, Vikhroli (West), Vs. Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Mumbai Bkc, Mumbai - 400051 Pan:Aagts9805F Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Shubham Nagri Sahakari The Pr. Commissioner Of Patsanstha Maryadit, Income Tax-29, 997, 2/2, Aadarsh Housing C-10, 3Rd Floor, Pratyaksha Kar Society, Parksite, Vikhroli (West), Vs. Bhavan, Bkc, Mumbai Mumbai Pan:Aagts9805F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ravindra Naik (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing: 01/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 18/07/2019

gains of business and profession’ and eligible to claim deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The society did not carry out any activity except providing credit facility to its members. The Ld. counsel for the assessee placing reliance on the decisions of the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Shri Mahadeshwar Sahakari Papedhi Maryadit