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

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

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,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

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)

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 the Assessee is Postal Employees Co-op. Credit Society registered under Maharashtra

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES M.S. PATEL CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

section 80P(2)d) of the Act.\"\n3. \"Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the\nLd. CIT(A) was correct in allowing deduction u/s.80P(2,(@) of the Income\nTax Act in respect of interest earned from deposits, though Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in a detailed judgment discussing the law and\nvarious related issues

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

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

gains of business. This is why Totgars struck a different note." 14. This apart, Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and another V Totgars Co- operative Sale Society, [2017] 392 ITR 74 (Karn.), has, after referring Hon’ble Apex Court Judgement in Totgar (Supra) held in para 7,8,9,10 as under: "7. However

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

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

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

INCOME TAX OFFICER 23.2.1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MIG CO OP HOUSING SOCIETY GROUP II LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

d) of the Act, without appreciating the fact that Section 80P of the Income tax Act was amended by inserting a new sub section (4) to as to provide that the provisions of the said section shall not apply in relation to any co-operative bank other than a primary agricultural credit Society or a primary cо-operative agricultural

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

D” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND\nSHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nITA no.1725/Mum./2023\n(Assessment Year : 2016-17)\nITA no.1726/Mum./2023\n(Assessment Year : 2017-18)\nShri Renukamata Multi-State Co-operative\nUrban Credit Society Ltd., 335/2AB\nBehind Pushpak Hotel, Pipe Line Road\nSavedi, Ahmednagar 414 003\nPAN – AADAS7782D\nITA no.1727/Mum./2023\n(Assessment