M/S VEEJAY FACILITY MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD,PANAJI vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

section 143(1)(a) talks of two different limbs, namely, `disallowance of expenditure’ and `increase in income’ 9 ITA.No.1/PAN

SHRI BASAVESHWAR PRATHAMIK KRISHI PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGHA N SUNADHOLI,SUNADHOLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GOKAK

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 030/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Basaveshwar Prathamik Krishi Pattin Sahakari Sangha At Post: Sundholi, Ta.: Sundholi Dist. Belagavi.-591310 Pan : Aahas0468A . . . . . . . Appellant

disallowance of deduction claimed under [section 10AA or under any of the provisions of Chapter VI-A under the heading "C.—Deductions in respect of certain incomes", if] the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub- section (1) of section 139; or 9

PRIYADARSHANI MAHILA CO-OP CR. SOCIETY LTD,BELAGAVI vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 032/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Priyadarshani Mahila Co-Op. Society Ltd. At Post: Kognoli, Ta.: Nippani Dist. Belagavi. Pan : Aabap2582L . . . . . . . Appellant

disallowance of deduction claimed under [section 10AA or under any of the provisions of Chapter VI-A under the heading "C.—Deductions in respect of certain incomes", if] the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139; or 9

FOMENTO KARNATAKA MINING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED (NOW AMALGAMATED WITH FOMENTO RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED,PANAJI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MARGAO RANGE, MARGAO

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.26/Pan/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Fomento Karnataka Mining Vs. Jcit, Margao Range, Company Private Limited, Margao, Goa. (Now Amalgamated With Fomento Resources Private Limited), 102, 1St Floor, Kamat Metropolis-I, Behind Caculo Mall, St. Inez, Panaji, Goa- 403001. Pan : Aaacf7487K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar Revenue By : Shri N. Shrikanth Date Of Hearing : 17.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Panaji [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 27.08.2021 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of The Companies Act, 1956. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Processing & Trading In The Iron Ore. The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Was Filed On 30.09.2009 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.26,40,77,220/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Margao Range, Margao (‘The Assessing Officer’) Vide Order Dated 30.12.2011 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) At A Total Income Of Rs.26,63,57,955/-. While Doing So, The Assessing Officer Made Disallowance U/S 14A Of Rs.15,49,787/-, Disallowance On Account Of Sundry Creditors Extracting As Fictitious Of Rs.7,30,948/-. 3. Being Aggrieved, An Appeal Was Filed Before The Ld. Cit(A) Contending That No Disallowance U/S 14A Is Required To Be Made In The Absence Of Any Expenditure Incurred To Earn The Exempt Income. It Was Also Contended That No Addition On Account Of Outstanding Creditors Is Required To Be Made, As The Credits Represent The Opening

section 14A was not correct. It will be in those cases where the assessee in his return has himself apportioned but the Assessing Officer was not accepting the said apportionment. In that eventuality, it will have to record its satisfaction to this effect. Further, while recording such a satisfaction, the nature of the loan taken by the assessee for purchasing

NAVANIRMAN MULTIPURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, BELAGAVI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 116/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Navanirman Multipurpose Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd., Laxmi Nagar, Hindalaga, Dist. Belagavi.-591108 Pan : Aacan0420G . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Belagavi. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 07/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/08/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; By Captioned Appeal The Assessee Impugns Din & Order 1074658686(1) Dt. 18/03/2025 Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac/Cit(A)’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 15/02/2024 Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act By National Faceless E- Asstt Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Year 2016-17 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

disallowance made by the Revenue for belated filing of return was vacated in view of the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case ‘Chirakkal Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. Vs CIT’ [2016, 68 taxmann.com 298 (Ker)]. 5. Per contra, the Ld. DR Uniyal sought our attention to para 5 of the Ld. Co-ordinate bench’s decision

ALLAMAPRABHU VUSS NI, KALLOLI,KALLOLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 063/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Allamaprabhu Vuss Niyamit Kalloli 09, Allamaprabhu Vuss Niyamit Kalloli, Kalloli So Dist. Belagavi. Pan : Aafaa8818E . . . . . . . Appellant

9. The bare reading of substituted provisions clearly suggest that, the jurisdiction of Ld. CPC s/c (v) of clause (a) of s/s (1) of section 143 of the Act to deny or disallow

BELLAD BAGEWADI KRISHI SEVA SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED,HUKKERI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GOKAK

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshalistay Application Nos.01, 02 & 03/Pan./2023 Arising Out Of Ita.Nos.11, 89 & 116/Pan./2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2020-2021 Along With Ita.Nos.11, 89 & 116/Pan./2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2020-2021 & Ita.Nos. 05 & 06/Pan./2020 Assessment Years 2007-2008 & 2008-2009 Bellad Bagewadi Krishi Seva The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Sangh Bellad Ward-1, Bagewadi, Taluka Hukkeri, Dr. Ghogeri Building, Dist. Belagavi – 591 305 Vs. Belgaum Road, State Of Karnataka. Gokak – 591 307. Pan Aaaat0640C State Of Karnataka (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shivanand Halbhavi For Revenue : Shri N. Shrikanth Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.07.2023 Order

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) in the interest of justice.” 3. Both the learned representatives next invited our attention to the CIT(A)'s detailed discussion upholding the Assessing Officer’s action making sec.80P(2)(a)(i) deduction disallowance as under : “9

BELLAD BAGEWADI KRISHI SEVA SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,BELAGAVI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshalistay Application Nos.01, 02 & 03/Pan./2023 Arising Out Of Ita.Nos.11, 89 & 116/Pan./2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2020-2021 Along With Ita.Nos.11, 89 & 116/Pan./2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2020-2021 & Ita.Nos. 05 & 06/Pan./2020 Assessment Years 2007-2008 & 2008-2009 Bellad Bagewadi Krishi Seva The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Sangh Bellad Ward-1, Bagewadi, Taluka Hukkeri, Dr. Ghogeri Building, Dist. Belagavi – 591 305 Vs. Belgaum Road, State Of Karnataka. Gokak – 591 307. Pan Aaaat0640C State Of Karnataka (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shivanand Halbhavi For Revenue : Shri N. Shrikanth Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.07.2023 Order

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) in the interest of justice.” 3. Both the learned representatives next invited our attention to the CIT(A)'s detailed discussion upholding the Assessing Officer’s action making sec.80P(2)(a)(i) deduction disallowance as under : “9

BELLAD BAGEWADI KRISHI SEVA SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED,HUKKERI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GOKAK

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshalistay Application Nos.01, 02 & 03/Pan./2023 Arising Out Of Ita.Nos.11, 89 & 116/Pan./2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2020-2021 Along With Ita.Nos.11, 89 & 116/Pan./2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2020-2021 & Ita.Nos. 05 & 06/Pan./2020 Assessment Years 2007-2008 & 2008-2009 Bellad Bagewadi Krishi Seva The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Sangh Bellad Ward-1, Bagewadi, Taluka Hukkeri, Dr. Ghogeri Building, Dist. Belagavi – 591 305 Vs. Belgaum Road, State Of Karnataka. Gokak – 591 307. Pan Aaaat0640C State Of Karnataka (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shivanand Halbhavi For Revenue : Shri N. Shrikanth Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.07.2023 Order

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) in the interest of justice.” 3. Both the learned representatives next invited our attention to the CIT(A)'s detailed discussion upholding the Assessing Officer’s action making sec.80P(2)(a)(i) deduction disallowance as under : “9

BELLAD BAGEWADI KRISHI SEVA SAHAKARI SSANGH NIYAMIT,HUKKERI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshalistay Application Nos.01, 02 & 03/Pan./2023 Arising Out Of Ita.Nos.11, 89 & 116/Pan./2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2020-2021 Along With Ita.Nos.11, 89 & 116/Pan./2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2020-2021 & Ita.Nos. 05 & 06/Pan./2020 Assessment Years 2007-2008 & 2008-2009 Bellad Bagewadi Krishi Seva The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Sangh Bellad Ward-1, Bagewadi, Taluka Hukkeri, Dr. Ghogeri Building, Dist. Belagavi – 591 305 Vs. Belgaum Road, State Of Karnataka. Gokak – 591 307. Pan Aaaat0640C State Of Karnataka (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shivanand Halbhavi For Revenue : Shri N. Shrikanth Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.07.2023 Order

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) in the interest of justice.” 3. Both the learned representatives next invited our attention to the CIT(A)'s detailed discussion upholding the Assessing Officer’s action making sec.80P(2)(a)(i) deduction disallowance as under : “9

BELLAD BAGEWADI KRISHI SEVA SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED,HUKKERI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GOKAK

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshalistay Application Nos.01, 02 & 03/Pan./2023 Arising Out Of Ita.Nos.11, 89 & 116/Pan./2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2020-2021 Along With Ita.Nos.11, 89 & 116/Pan./2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2020-2021 & Ita.Nos. 05 & 06/Pan./2020 Assessment Years 2007-2008 & 2008-2009 Bellad Bagewadi Krishi Seva The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Sangh Bellad Ward-1, Bagewadi, Taluka Hukkeri, Dr. Ghogeri Building, Dist. Belagavi – 591 305 Vs. Belgaum Road, State Of Karnataka. Gokak – 591 307. Pan Aaaat0640C State Of Karnataka (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shivanand Halbhavi For Revenue : Shri N. Shrikanth Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.07.2023 Order

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) in the interest of justice.” 3. Both the learned representatives next invited our attention to the CIT(A)'s detailed discussion upholding the Assessing Officer’s action making sec.80P(2)(a)(i) deduction disallowance as under : “9

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

section 80P in respect of the profits from the business of providing credit facilities to the members. " after already holding "that the appellant is not a co-operative bank but a co-operative society. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in disallowing the claim of the appellant

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1. BIJAPUR., BIJAPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

disallowance of provisions under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue has submitted that the Tribunal grossly erred in deciding the appeal merely by placing reliance on the decision rendered by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Vector Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. without reference to the facts

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1. BIJAPUR., BIJAPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

disallowance of provisions under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue has submitted that the Tribunal grossly erred in deciding the appeal merely by placing reliance on the decision rendered by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Vector Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. without reference to the facts

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BAGALKOT., BAGALKOT

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

disallowance of provisions under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue has submitted that the Tribunal grossly erred in deciding the appeal merely by placing reliance on the decision rendered by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Vector Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. without reference to the facts

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BAGALKOT., BAGALKOT

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

disallowance of provisions under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue has submitted that the Tribunal grossly erred in deciding the appeal merely by placing reliance on the decision rendered by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Vector Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. without reference to the facts

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD, BELGAUM., BELGAUM

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

disallowance of provisions under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue has submitted that the Tribunal grossly erred in deciding the appeal merely by placing reliance on the decision rendered by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Vector Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. without reference to the facts

RYATAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMIT.,HUBLI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1. BIJAPUR., BIJAPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

disallowance of provisions under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue has submitted that the Tribunal grossly erred in deciding the appeal merely by placing reliance on the decision rendered by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Vector Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. without reference to the facts