ASSTT. COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI vs. INFRASTRUCTURE LOGISTICS PVT. LTD., DONA PAULA

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 380/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Infrastructure Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Cidade De Goa, Vainguinim Beach, Dona Paula, Goa-403 004. Pan : Aaaci9107R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1, Panaji-Goa, ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 381/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji-Goa, .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

dividend income, therefore, he had wrongly assumed jurisdiction u/s.14A of the Act, as a result whereof the disallowance of Rs. 15,03,242/- determined by him by triggering the mechanism contemplated in Rule 8D(2)(iii) cannot be sustained and is liable to be vacated. As we have vacated the disallowance made by the A.O u/s.14A(2)(iii) for want

INFRASTRUCTURE LOGISTICS PVT. LTD.,DONA PAULA vs. JOINT COMM. OF INCOME TAX, RANGE - 1, PANAJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 380/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Infrastructure Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Cidade De Goa, Vainguinim Beach, Dona Paula, Goa-403 004. Pan : Aaaci9107R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1, Panaji-Goa, ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 381/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji-Goa, .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

dividend income, therefore, he had wrongly assumed jurisdiction u/s.14A of the Act, as a result whereof the disallowance of Rs. 15,03,242/- determined by him by triggering the mechanism contemplated in Rule 8D(2)(iii) cannot be sustained and is liable to be vacated. As we have vacated the disallowance made by the A.O u/s.14A(2)(iii) for want

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI vs. M/S SOCIADADE DE FOMENTO INDUSTRIAL P. LTD, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

dividend. Though the Ld A.R placed reliance on the decision rendered by Calcutta bench of Tribunal, we are unable to accept the same in view of the. clear provisions prescribed in Rule 2(H) of Rule 8D of the Income tax Rules. For the sake of convenience, we extract below the relevant provisions:- "B the average of value of investments

SOCIEADADE DE FOMENTO INDL. PVT. LTD.,MARGAO vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MARGAO RANGE, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

dividend. Though the Ld A.R placed reliance on the decision rendered by Calcutta bench of Tribunal, we are unable to accept the same in view of the. clear provisions prescribed in Rule 2(H) of Rule 8D of the Income tax Rules. For the sake of convenience, we extract below the relevant provisions:- "B the average of value of investments

PRATHAMIK KRUSHI PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,BEDKIHAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, NIPANI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) Asstt Sr

disallowance, we deem it necessary to reiterate certain key factual matrix of the case here viz; (1) the appellant is a registered society under State Co-op Societies Act (2) the appellant is a Co-operative Society within the meaning of section 2(19) of the Act (3) the appellant is engaged in providing credit facilities to its member

SHRI GOPALKRISHNA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,BHATKAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KARWAR

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) Asstt Sr

disallowance, we deem it necessary to reiterate certain key factual matrix of the case here viz; (1) the appellant is a registered society under State Co-op Societies Act (2) the appellant is a Co-operative Society within the meaning of section 2(19) of the Act (3) the appellant is engaged in providing credit facilities to its member

SHRI GOPALKRISHNA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,BHATKAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KARWAR

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) Asstt Sr

disallowance, we deem it necessary to reiterate certain key factual matrix of the case here viz; (1) the appellant is a registered society under State Co-op Societies Act (2) the appellant is a Co-operative Society within the meaning of section 2(19) of the Act (3) the appellant is engaged in providing credit facilities to its member

THE MARCEL URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,MARCEL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3), PANAJI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) Asstt Sr

disallowance, we deem it necessary to reiterate certain key factual matrix of the case here viz; (1) the appellant is a registered society under State Co-op Societies Act (2) the appellant is a Co-operative Society within the meaning of section 2(19) of the Act (3) the appellant is engaged in providing credit facilities to its member

M/S CHOWGULE AND COMPANY (SALT) PVT. LTD,MORMUGAO vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, MARGAO

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of aforesaid observation

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. : 390/Pan/2017 करधििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 M/S Chowgule & Company (Salt) Pvt Ltd., Chowgule House, Mormugao Harbour, Goa – 403803. Pan: Aabcc 5595 J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Margao, Goa. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Ms Hiral Sejpal Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Jamlappa D Battull Am; The Present Appeal Filed By The Appellant Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax- Appeals, Panaji-1 [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 09/10/2017 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which In Turn Tousled Out Of Order Of Assessment Of Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-Circle-2, Margoa [For Short “Ao”] Dt. 27/07/2014 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act, For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2012-2013. Itat-Panaji Page 1 Of 23

dividend income which is claimed as exempt u/s 10(35) of the I.T. Act. 6) The Learned CIT(A) has erred in interpreting that Section 14A mandates maintenance of separate books of account relating to investments. He has also erred in observing that the books of accounts and other documentary evidence relating to the investment and expenditure was not produced

EDC LIMITED.,PANAJI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), NFAC, DELHI, PANAJI

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

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

dividend income of Rs.74,52,725/-, but however, the AO did not satisfy with the said submissions as made by the assessee to consider those investments which yielded exempt income for the purpose of computing disallowance of expenditure. The assessee reiterated the same submissions before the CIT(A), but however, CIT(A) confirmed the order of AO. Before

SCORPIO IRON LTD,PANAJI vs. ITO, WARD - 1(4), PANAJI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

dividend income. After verifying these facts Assessing Officer accepted the assessee's plea and no disallowance were made. In any case before triggering of disallowance u/s 14A, it is axiomatic that assessee must have incurred expenditure in relation to the earning of exempt income and such expenditure has been debited to the profit and loss account or claimed as deduction

SHREE AMBEY FORGING PRIVAT LIMITED,PANAJI vs. ITO, WARD - (4), PANAJI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

dividend income. After verifying these facts Assessing Officer accepted the assessee's plea and no disallowance were made. In any case before triggering of disallowance u/s 14A, it is axiomatic that assessee must have incurred expenditure in relation to the earning of exempt income and such expenditure has been debited to the profit and loss account or claimed as deduction

SHRI JADISIDDESHWAR URBAN CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,SUNADHOLI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HUBLI

The appeal stands PARTLY ALLOWED

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2020-21 Shri Jadisiddeshwar Urban Co-Operative Credit Society, Ltd. At Post: Sunadholi, Dist. Belgavi-591136 Pan:Aaaaj2715N . . . . . . . Appellant

disallowed for the purpose of taxation. The assessee’s representation made vide letter dt. 05/03/2025 when failed to inspire any confidence that, (i) earning of interest or dividend by one co-operative society from another one co-operative society (by establishment/incorporation) is deductible u/s 80P(2)(d), and (ii) earning of interest from other banks including co-operative banks

M/S SHREE BALAJI CONCEPTS,MARGAO vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TXATION), WARD -1, PANAJI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 73/Pan/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13

dividends referred to in section 115-0.1 34[Explanation 1].—For the purposes of this section, where any interest or other sum as aforesaid is credited to any account, whether called "Interest payable account" or "Suspense account" or by any other name, in the books of account of the person liable to pay such income, such crediting shall be deemed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2(2), , BELGAVI vs. SHIVA CREDIT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMIT, BELGAVI

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

dividends rights, if any, by following the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of The Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd., vs., ACIT in Appeal No.10245 of 2017 dated 08.08.2017 and M/s. Totgars’ Co- Operative Sale Society Ltd., vs., ITO in Appeal No.1622 of 2010. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue

THE MARKANDEY MAHILA MULTIPURPOSE CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD,BELGAUM vs. ITO, WARD - 1(2), BELGAUM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 372/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Markendey Mahila Multipurpose Co-Op Society Ltd.,12, At Post-Kangrail-Khurd, Taluka & Dist. Belgaum. Pan : Aabam5563C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(2), Belgaum ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod Vaidhya, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. Dr

disallowing deduction u/s.80P(2)(d). 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that for the purpose of section 80P(2)(d) a Co-operative bank should be considered as a Co- operative society. 3. Without prejudice to above, the learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the assessee was in the business of providing credit facilities