VIDHARBHA KONKAN GRAMIN BANK ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. These appeals are filed by the assessee challenging the impugned orders of even date 09/10/2018, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–1, Nagpur, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2014–15 and 2015–16 respectively. Vidarbha Konkan Gramin Bank A.Y. 2014–15 & 2015–16 ITA no.7/Nag./2019 Assessee

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. THE VIDARBHA CO OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry& Shri K.M. Roy

4. As observed above that the issue qua deduction claimed under section 80(P)(2)(d) on account of interest/dividend income earned from co-operative banks, is squarely covered in favour of the Assessee and, therefore, addition made by disallowing

BHATADI OPENCAST KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT ,BHATADI,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD-1, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

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 3 ITA.No. 89/NAG/2025 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

DURGAPUR RAYATWARI COLLIERY KAMGAR SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD-2, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

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

4 Durgapur Rayatwari Colliery Kamgar Sahakari Pat Sanstha A.Y. 2018–19 and 2020–21 The Assessing Officer, therefore, in view of the detailed analysis made in the assessment order vide Page–2 to 10, the deduction of ` 91,47,236, claimed by the assessee under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act is hereby disallowed

DURGAPUR RAYATWARI COLLIERY KAMGAR SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

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

4 Durgapur Rayatwari Colliery Kamgar Sahakari Pat Sanstha A.Y. 2018–19 and 2020–21 The Assessing Officer, therefore, in view of the detailed analysis made in the assessment order vide Page–2 to 10, the deduction of ` 91,47,236, claimed by the assessee under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act is hereby disallowed

JAI KONDESHWAR NAGARI SAHAKARI BADNERAPAT SANSTHA MARYADIT ,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3, AMRAVATI, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed in the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

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

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the A

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

D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The captioned appeal has been filed by the Revenue challenging the impugned order dated 26/09/2019, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–1, Nagpur [“learned CIT(A)”] for the assessment year 2014–15. 2. The Revenue has raised following grounds:– “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

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

disallowed the exemption u/s 80P. Hence grounds 1,4,5 and 7 are decided against the assessee.” 11 Hinganghat Nagri Sahakari Pat Sanstha ITA no.569/Nag./2024 4. We are in complete disagreement with the conclusion drawn by the learned CIT(A). He has completely misunderstood the ratio of the cases. Provisions of section 80AC

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

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

disallowed the exemption u/s 80P. Hence grounds 1,4,5 and 7 are decided against the assessee.” 11 Hinganghat Nagri Sahakari Pat Sanstha ITA no.569/Nag./2024 4. We are in complete disagreement with the conclusion drawn by the learned CIT(A). He has completely misunderstood the ratio of the cases. Provisions of section 80AC

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

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

disallowed the exemption u/s 80P. Hence grounds 1,4,5 and 7 are decided against the assessee.” 11 Hinganghat Nagri Sahakari Pat Sanstha ITA no.569/Nag./2024 4. We are in complete disagreement with the conclusion drawn by the learned CIT(A). He has completely misunderstood the ratio of the cases. Provisions of section 80AC

DCIT AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA, AKOLA vs. THE AKOLA JANATA COMMERCIAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., AKOLA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

4. Facts in brief are that the assessee is an AOP and is engaged in the business of Co-operative Society. The return of income has e- filed on 12/11/2012 declaring total income of Rs.34,649/-. The AO has assessed the total income after disallowance of claim u/s.80P(2)(d) of Rs.42,57,348/-. 5. By the impugned order

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

disallowed even prior to 2018. Relevanit extract of the order is as\nunder:\nThe Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of EBR Enterprises Vs. Union of\nIndia 415 ITR 139 (Bombay), dated 4th June, 2019 has held as under:\nQuote, 5. As per this provision, where the assessee fails to make a claim in his\nreturn of income

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR vs. M/S WESTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed

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

disallowance of claim of deduction u/s 32AC of I.T. Act 1961. D) The details of plant & machinery submitted before A.O. are enclosed herewith and it is specifically asserted that assessee has not claimed any deduction in Plant & Machinery except Telecommunication System which is liable to be excluded in terms of definition of new assets provided under section 32AC(4

THE GREEN CITY NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC) has erred in law and has wrongly interpreted the deduction u/s 8OP(2)(a)(i) with section 8OP(2)(d) and wrongly disallowed

SOHAN HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD,YAVATMAL vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

4. In all the appeals under consideration involve a common controversy emerged and challenged by the assessees / appellants that the disallowance made by the learned AO on account of delayed payment of the employees contribution to PF/ESIC paid after the due date of payment under the relevant statutes by invoking provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s

HANSA CITY BUS SERVICES(NAGPUR) P LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

4. In all the appeals under consideration involve a common controversy emerged and challenged by the assessees / appellants that the disallowance made by the learned AO on account of delayed payment of the employees contribution to PF/ESIC paid after the due date of payment under the relevant statutes by invoking provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s

NARESH JAMPRASAD TIWARI,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

4. In all the appeals under consideration involve a common controversy emerged and challenged by the assessees / appellants that the disallowance made by the learned AO on account of delayed payment of the employees contribution to PF/ESIC paid after the due date of payment under the relevant statutes by invoking provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s

SEQUEL MOTORS PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

In the result, the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

4. In all the appeals under consideration involve a common controversy emerged and challenged by the assessees / appellants that the disallowance made by the learned AO on account of delayed payment of the employees contribution to PF/ESIC paid after the due date of payment under the relevant statutes by invoking provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s