AMRAVATI JILHA VIMA KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

D E R The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the impugned order dated 18/12/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2020–21. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. The order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income

SIDDHIVINAYAK NAGRIK SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

80P(2)(d), had therein rendered his order as erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the Pr.CIT not finding favour with the reply of the assessee, wherein the latter had tried to impress upon him that it was duly eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act, therein “set aside

SIDDHIVINAYAK NAGRIK SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

80P(2)(d), had therein rendered his order as erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the Pr.CIT not finding favour with the reply of the assessee, wherein the latter had tried to impress upon him that it was duly eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act, therein “set aside

SIDDHIVINAYAK NAGRIK SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

80P(2)(d), had therein rendered his order as erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the Pr.CIT not finding favour with the reply of the assessee, wherein the latter had tried to impress upon him that it was duly eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act, therein “set aside

THE ISMAILIA URBAN CO-OP SOCIETY LTD.,YAVATMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

D E R PER K.M.ROY, A.M. The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 12/02/2021, passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the learned AO, National E-Assessment Centre, [“learned ITO, NEAC”], for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal

JALSAMPDA KARMCHARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,WARDHA vs. ITO WARD 2 , WARDHA

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryjalsampda Karmchari Ito, Ward-2, Wardha. Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit Wardha, 1, Dr. Vs. Adyalkar Bhavan, Arvi Road, Shivaji Square, Wardha-442001 Pan: Aaaaw 0478 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

delay is condoned. 4. In this case, the Assessee is a cooperative society engaged in accepting deposits and providing credit facilities to its members, consisting of only employees of Irrigation department of Maharashtra State in Wardha District. The Assessee by filing its return of income on dated 01/11/2017 and declaring total income at Rs. NIL, claimed the deduction under Chapter

NIMSHASKIYA MADHYANIK SHALEY KARAMCHARI SAHAKARI SANSTHA LTD.,WARDHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 08/03/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2017–18. 2. During the course of hearing, the Registry has pointed out a delay

M/S. NEERI CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

D E R The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 31/01/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2017–18. 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “In the facts and circumstances of the case

JANKALYAN SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,TUMSAR vs. ITO WARD - 1, BHANDARA, BHANDARA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

delay being minor, the same is hereby condoned. 4. The short issue that we need to adjudication relates to addition under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on account of interest income earned from Nationalised Bank by treating it as income from other sources. 5. The assessee is a Society registered under the Maharashtra Co– operative Societies

B P ERGO EMPLOYEE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY MARYADIT,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(4), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, Assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical\npurposes

Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act on account of interest income from nationalized banks. The assessee had not complied with the opportunities given by the CIT(A) and could not furnish documentary evidence to support its claim.", "held": "The Tribunal condoned the delay

RAJURA NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,CHANDRAPUR vs. OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5, CHANDRAPUR

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

2 Rajura Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit ITA no.483/Nag./2024 3. The AO and learned CIT(A) ought to have allowed the deduction u/s 80P of the I.T. Act, 1961 as claimed in the Return of Income. 4. The learned CIT(A) erred in not providing sufficient opportunity of being heard, thereby breaching principles of natural justice. 5. The Appellant

SANT TUKDOJI NAGRI SHAHKARI PAT SANSTHA LIMITED, HINGANGHAT,HINGANGHAT vs. ITO WARD - 2, WARDHA

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. Captioned appeal by the assessee is against the impugned order dated 06/06/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2020–21. 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. The learned CIT(A) erred

PANHERA GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,BULDHANA vs. ITO WARD-2, KHAMGAON, KHAMGAON

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. The captioned appeal by the assessee are emanating from the impugned orders of even date 14/06/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2020–21. 2. During the course of hearing, the Registry has pointed out a delay

ASHA VINOD TATTE,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

condonation of delay is thus unjustified and unwarranted. 4. Order imposing penalty u/s 271D of I.T. Act 1961 is illegal, invalid and bad in law in the absence of any satisfaction in the assessment proceedings in the case of assessee. 5. In levy of penalty u/s 271D on amount of Rs.6,51,000/- includes Rs.6,00,000/- paid by cheque

PANHERA GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,BULDHANA vs. ITO WARD-2, KHAMGAON, KHAMGAON

In the result, assessee’s appeal being ITA no

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. The present appeals by the assessee are emanating from the impugned orders of even date 14/06/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2020–21. ITA no.495/Nag./2024 Assessee’s Appeal – A.Y. 2020-21 2. The assessee

PANHERA GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,BULDHANA vs. ITO WARD-2, KHAMGAON, KHAMGAON

In the result, assessee’s appeal being ITA no

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. The present appeals by the assessee are emanating from the impugned orders of even date 14/06/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2020–21. ITA no.495/Nag./2024 Assessee’s Appeal – A.Y. 2020-21 2. The assessee

VNIT KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(5), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 15/12/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2019–20. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds:– “Whether on the facts

POLICE KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA GONDIA,GONDIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2, GONDIA

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

D. It is submitted that the Assessee's taxation relted compliance matters were primarily looked after by member Shalu Chhatrapal Maragaye, who unfortunately passed away on 23/11/2023. A copy of the death certificate is enclosed for reference. Due to her demise, there was a period of transition wherein the Assessee had to reorganize its internal compliance structure, update email credentials

HIVTAP NIRMULAN KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,YAVATMAL vs. ITO WARD-1 , YAVATMAL

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalehivtap Nirmulan Karmachari, Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit T.B. Karyalayapandharkawada Road, ……………. Appellant Yavatmal -445 001, Maharashtra. Pan–Aabah6751K V/S Income Tax Officer, ……………. Respondent Ward–1, Yavatmal-445001, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.Naresh Jakhotia.A.R. Revenue By :Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

D E R The assessee has filed the appeal against the order dated 08/08/2025 passed by the CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi, u/sec 143(3) and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") for the A.Y. 2018–19. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:– “1 That on the facts