DAMODAR MANGALJI & COMPANY LIMITED,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

Appeals stands DISMISSED

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 034 & 035/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2014-15 Damodar Mangalji & Company Ltd. Damodar Niwas, 1St Floor, Mc Road, Panaji, Goa-403001. Pan : Aaacd6880G . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Jt./Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1/Circle-1(1), Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Adv Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr M Satish [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 20/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/12/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Twin Appeals Of Assessee Instituted U/S 253(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Are Directed Against Separate Din & Order 1070138041(1) Dt. 08/11/2024 & 1070321994(1) Dt. 13/11/2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac/Cit(A)’] Which Sprang From Assessment Orders Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Anent To Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2014-15 [‘Ay’].

condonation of delay and behind non prosecution of appeals are prima-facie flimsy, without any evidence and they not only lack bonafide, but are with much less imputables, and (ii) on the basis of evidence adduced in the course of assessment, the Ld. AO came to categorical findings in making disallowances

NEW NAVHIND MULTIPURPOSE MULTISTATE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (Judicial Member)

condoning the delay in filling the appeal and sustaining the disallowance of deduction u/sec80P of the Act by the Assessing

ZUARI INDUSTRIES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ZUARI GLOBAL LTD),ZUARINAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.71/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2018-19 ) Zuari Industries Limited, Vs National Faceless Jai Kisaan Bhawan, Assessment Centre, Zuarinagar, Delhi. Mormugo, Goa-403728. Pan/Gir No. Aaacz0306P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Ankit Goyal.Ar Revenue By Shri.Captain Pradeep Arya.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 10.06.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 11.06.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assesse Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Delhi /Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assesse Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A) Sustaining The Disallowance U/Sec14Aof The Act & Not Condoning The Delay In Filling The Appeal. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assesse Company Is Engaged In The Business. The Assesse Has Filed The Return Of Income For A.Y.2018-19 On 29.11.2018 Disclosing

disallowance u/sec14Aof the Act and not condoning the delay in filling the appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case

DEARHOOD FOUNDATION,BELAGAVI vs. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. No.202/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2022-23 ) Dear Hood Foundation, Ddit, Vs. Plot.No.1/S,Kanbargi Cpc, Industrial Area, Bengaluru-560500. Kanabargi.S.O, Karnataka. Belgaum-590015, Karnataka. Pan/Gir No. Aaicd1005D (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Appellant By Shri.Pramod Y Vaidya.Ar Revenue By Shri.Sanket Deshmukh.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 23.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm:

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The Brief facts of the case are that, the assesse is a company incorporated under section 8 of the companies Act 2013 and is also registered u/sec 12A(1) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee has filed the return of income

CENTRE FOR INCUBATION AND BUSINESS ACCELERATION,VERNA vs. CENTRALIZE PROCESSING CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.152/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2024-25 ) Centre For Incubation & Vs. I T O- Exemption, Business Acceleration, Ward-1, Angel Charities, Pundalik Niwas, Angel Ashram, Panaji-403001, Verna, Salcete, Goa. Goa-403722. Pan/Gir No. Aafcc5621B (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Appellant By Shri.Mahendra Gohel.Ar Revenue By Smt. Rijula Uniyal. Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm:

disallowing the claim of exemption u/sec 11 & u/sec11(2) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, submissions of the assessee and findings of the AO and observed that the assessee has filed the return of income claiming exemption

RAJA BHAT AND KUMUDA FOUNDATION,BELAGAVI vs. PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , BELAGAVI

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2022-23 Raja Bhat & Kumuda Foundation Plot No. 4, Rs No1368, Kumudini, Sadashiv Nagar, Belgavi-590001 Pan:Aajcr6351B . . . . . . . Appellant

condone the delay & default and re-process the ITR for allowing exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the Act in accordance with law. The appellant assessee thus succeeds and in result the second ground of the appeal stands allowed. 14. Now coming to the legal ground of appeal; it is mindful to state that, the bare but conjoint reading of provisions

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PATTO PLAZA vs. ESTEEM INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, PLOT

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavankumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

Delay (if considered) is condoned and advanced accordingly. ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 20 DCIT Vs Esteem Industries Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos.253/PAN/2024 AY: 2012-13 4. Succinctly stated facts of the case are that; the assessee an incorporated company and engaged in manufacturing of surfactants & speciality chemicals. The assessee company filed its return of income on 27/09/2012 declaring total income

M/S. AHILIABAI SARDESSAI, ,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

condone the said delay. 5. The assessee raised four grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) justified in restricting the addition made by the AO under Rule 8D(2)iii) of the Rules. 6. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that the assessee earned exempt income

M/S. AHILIABAI SARDESSAI, ,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

condone the said delay. 5. The assessee raised four grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) justified in restricting the addition made by the AO under Rule 8D(2)iii) of the Rules. 6. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that the assessee earned exempt income

VIVIDODDSHESHA PRATHAMIK GRAMEEN KRUSHI SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT SOUDATTI,SOUDATTI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4, BELGAUM, BELGAUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

THE MARATHA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,BELGAUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 5, BELGAUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

THE ADARSH MULTIPURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1-(2) , BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

SAMARTH URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,BELGAUM vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , BELAGAVI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

SHREE BASVANNA MAHADEV CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6, BELGAUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

HAVYAKA CREDIT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMITA,KUMTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KARWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

SHRI JAI JINENDRA CREDIT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LIMITED,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 NIPANI, BELAGAVI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

VPK URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,MARDOL, PONDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANAJI, GOA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

VPK URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,MARDOL, PONDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANAJI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

VPK URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,MARDOL, PONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT, NEAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members