JAI JALARAM CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 29(1)(5), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for esult appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for esult appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Jai Jalaram Co-Operative Credit The Ito Ward 29(1)(5), Society Ltd., Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Vs. Shop No. -2 Ground Floor, Shop Complex, No. -2 Ground Floor, Mulund Mumbai-400051. Siddhivinayak C.H.S. Near Punjab National Bank Zaver Road, Mulund West, Mumbai-400080. Pan No. Aaaaj 2603 B Appellant Respondent

disallowed the deduction claimed for the interest earned from Cooperative banks u/s 80P. With regard to the interest or erative banks u/s 80P. With regard to the interest or erative banks u/s 80P. With regard to the interest or dividend income earned from a Co dividend income earned from a Co-operative bank/ Scheduled operative bank/ Scheduled Bank

GOLD COIN APARTMENTS CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 22(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

disallowance on the contending the Assessee was entitled to claim deduction of INR.3,15,256/- under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. 4. We have heard both the sides on the issue and have perused the material on record. 5. The appeal preferred by the Assessee is delayed by 101 days. In the application seeking condonation of delay

PARSI SALSETTE BLDG NO. 1 CHS LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 24(3)(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No. II raised by the Assessee is allowed and as a result, Ground No

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

disallowance made fell outside the scope of adjustments specified in Section 143(1) of the Act and (b) in Ground No. II that even on merits the Assessee was entitled to claim deduction under Section 80P(2

EKTA SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADIT,VIRAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASSESSMENT UNIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

80P(2) of the Act amounting to Rs.2,11,08,184 /- was disallowed.\n7. In the subsequent appeal before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee contented that it was registered Co-op. Society registered with Department of Cooperation Maharashtra State vide Registration Number. Being the registered Society, it has own byelaws which are also approved by the Registrar of Societies

EKTA SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADIT,VIRAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASSESSMENT UNIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

80P(2) of the Act amounting to Rs.2,11,08,184 /- was disallowed.\n7. In the subsequent appeal before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee contented that it was registered Co-op. Society registered with Department of Cooperation Maharashtra State vide Registration Number. Being the registered Society, it has own byelaws which are also approved by the Registrar of Societies

THE SUVARNA NAGAR CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD, 34(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawalassessment Year : 2019-20

disallowance of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest income received from the Co-operative Banks. The assessee is a registered Co-operative Housing Society and during the assessment year 2018-19 earned interest income of Rs. 50,39,861 from the investments made in various Co-operative Banks. 9. Before proceeding further

SHRI KUMAR COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. JAO MUM -W-22(3)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2021-22 Shrikumar Co-Operative Housing Asst. Dir. Of I. Tax, Cpc Jao Mum- Society Ltd., W-22(3)(1), Vs. Nehru Road, Santacruz (East), Piramal Chamber, Mumbai-400055. Mumbai-400012. Pan No. Aaaas 8110 J Appellant Respondent

disallowed in the above-mentioned order. mentioned order. 5.2. The appellant has claimed deduction under Section 80P. The 5.2. The appellant has claimed deduction under Section 80P. The 5.2. The appellant has claimed deduction under Section 80P. The relevant part of the Act is being reproduced below: relevant part of the Act is being reproduced below: "80P(1) Where

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), THANE, THANE vs. JEEVAN VIKAS NAGRI SAHAKARI PATPEDI MARYADIT, VASAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19 are\nallowed

section 80P(2)(a) has become\nacademic in view of our decision with respect to allowability of deduction under\nsection 80P(2)(d). In result the appeal of the assessee is allowed.\n19. With regard to revenue's appeal, it is contended that the CIT(A) has simply\nplaced reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4.1 , THANE, THANE vs. JEEVAN VIKAS NAGRI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADIT, MARYADT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19 are allowed

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Ms Padmavathy S, Am

section 80P(2)(d). In result the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 19. With regard to revenue's appeal, it is contended that the CIT(A) has simply placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd(supra) without factually examining whether the ratio laid down

JEEVAN VIKAS NAGRI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADIT ,PALGHAR vs. ITO, CIR-4 , THANE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19 are allowed

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Ms Padmavathy S, Am

section 80P(2)(d). In result the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 19. With regard to revenue's appeal, it is contended that the CIT(A) has simply placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank Ltd(supra) without factually examining whether the ratio laid down

MUMBAI KAMGAR MADHYAWARTI GRAHAK SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 20(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

b) of the Banking regulation Act anking regulation Act, shall be considered as co shall be considered as co- operative society eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The operative society eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The operative society eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The Co-ordinate

MUMBAI KAMGAR MADHYAWARTI GRAHAK SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 20(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

b) of the Banking regulation Act anking regulation Act, shall be considered as co shall be considered as co- operative society eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The operative society eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The operative society eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The Co-ordinate

MUMBAI KAMGAR MADHYAWARTI GRAHAK SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 20(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

b) of the Banking regulation Act anking regulation Act, shall be considered as co shall be considered as co- operative society eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The operative society eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The operative society eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. The Co-ordinate

INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASHAR IT PARK,THANE vs. THANE JILLHA PRATHAMIK SIKSHAK SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LTD, WAGLE ESTATE,THANE

Accordingly, all the ground raised by the Revenue in appeal for the Assessment Year 2020-21 are dismissed

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

B Wing, Wagle Indl. Estate, Road No. 16Z, Thane (W), Mumbai - 400604 …………… Appellant Vs Thane Jillha Prathamik Sikshak Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd 3, Ramchandra Nagar, Vaity Wadi, PO-Wagle Estate Thane-400604 ……………. Respondent [PAN: AAAAT7073P] Appearance For the Appellant/Department : Shri Subodh Ratnaparikh For the Respondent/Assessee : Shri P.D. Chougule Date Conclusion of hearing : 13.08.2024 Pronouncement of order

INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASHER IT PARK, WAGLE ESTATE, THANE vs. THANE JILLHA PRATHAMIK SIKSHAK SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LTD, THANE

Accordingly, all the ground raised by the Revenue in appeal for the Assessment Year 2020-21 are dismissed

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

B Wing, Wagle Indl. Estate, Road No. 16Z, Thane (W), Mumbai - 400604 …………… Appellant Vs Thane Jillha Prathamik Sikshak Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd 3, Ramchandra Nagar, Vaity Wadi, PO-Wagle Estate Thane-400604 ……………. Respondent [PAN: AAAAT7073P] Appearance For the Appellant/Department : Shri Subodh Ratnaparikh For the Respondent/Assessee : Shri P.D. Chougule Date Conclusion of hearing : 13.08.2024 Pronouncement of order

INCOME TAX OFFICER - 25(2)(1) MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI POSTAL EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue and cross-objection by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

disallowed the dividend of Rs.45,37,500 under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Mumbai Postal Employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. CO. No.57/Mum/2024 5. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, accepted the alternative contention of the assessee of claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of the interest and dividend received

DIRBADEVI SAHAKARI PATPEDI LTD ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WAR 27(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

b).\n(c)\n(d) in respect of any income by way of\ninterest or dividends derived by the co-operative society from its investments\nwith any other co-operative society, the whole of such income;\" On a\nperusal of Sec. 80P(2)(d), it can safely be gathered that interest income\nderived by an assessee co-operative society from

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BKC,MUMBAI vs. IDBI STAFF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, MUMBAI

b> Section 80P(4) of the Act even though without any amendment\nin Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act is sufficient to deny the claim of the assessee for\ndeduction under Section 8UP(2)(d) of the Act.\"\n3. \"Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law. the Ld.CIT(A)\nwas. correct in not considering