DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 12 PUNE, PUNE vs. JANATA GRAHAK MADHYAWARTI SAHKARI SANGH MARYADIT, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

TDS from the interest other than interest on securities. Therefore it cannot be said that cooperative banks are excluded from the definition of cooperative societies by such an amendment. AYs. 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2020-21 30. Moreover, as reliance placed on the aforesaid decision for applicability of section 80P(4) of the Act in the facts of the case

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BODHI TOWER vs. KUMAR BUILDERS PROJECT PUNE PRIVATE LIMITED, BUND GARDEN

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

TDS credit of Rs.4,02,541/- thereby claiming a refund of Rs.4,02,541/-. The return was revised on 06.03.2020 claiming income tax refund of Rs.2541/- and carry forward loss of Rs.3,95,51,713/-. However, the CPC did not allow the claim of carry forward 2 business loss of Rs.3,95,51,713/- as claimed in the return

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5,SANGLI., SANGLI. vs. SHREE GANESH NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT, ASHTA,, ASHTA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2375/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Ito, Ward-5, Sangli. Vs. Shree Ganesh Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Ashta, Tal. Walwa, Dist. Sangli, Sangli- 416301. Pan : Aaaas8248R Appellant Respondent C. O. No.49/Pun/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.2375/Pun/2025) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shree Ganesh Nagari Vs. Ito, Ward-5, Sangli. Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Ashta, Tal. Walwa, Dist. Sangli, Sangli- 416301. Pan : Aaaas8248R Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Umesh Phade Assessee By : Shri Sarang Gudhate Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.08.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment

TDS under law, such disallowance would ultimately increase assessee's profits from business of developing housing project. The ultimate profits of assessee after adjusting disallowance under section 40 (a)(ia) of the Act would quality for deduction under section 80-18 of the Act. This view was taken by the courts in the following cases: 7 C.O. No.49/PUN/2025 • Income

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. MANORAMA COOP BANK LTD, SOLAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2157/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Acit, Cricle-2, Solapur. Vs. Manorama Co-Op. Bank Ltd., Plot 4, 5, 6 Vijapur Road, Indiranagar S.O., Maharashtra- 413004. Pan : Aajfm6823C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Shilpa N. C. Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15.07.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) The Ld Cit(A), Nfac Has Erred In Admitting This Exemption U/S 194A (3)(V) To The Assessee For Non-Deduction Of Tds On Interest Credits Of Nominal Members Who Are Not Actual Member As Per Definition Of Person Who Is Eligible For Membership As Per Clause

TDS on interest payment made to members/non-members is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Pune 'B' Bench rendered in the case of Nilkanth Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT [2020] 119 taxmann.com 369 (Pune Trib.). The facts of this case were that the assessee, a Co-operative Bank, filed its return declaring total income

ANAND URBAN COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(5), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

B Garud For Revenue : Shri Basavaraj Hiremath Date of Hearing : 07.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 07.03.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1058243687(1), dated 27.11.2023, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD., AURANGABAD. vs. TAPADIYA CONSTRUCTION LTD, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

TDS @1% u/s 1941A would also be required to be deducted for extra amenities such as club membership fees, car parking fee, electricity and water facility. maintenance fee or any other charges of similar nature paid at the time of purchase of property which are incidental to transfer of the immovable property. From the above it is clear that there

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, AHMEDNAGAR., AAYAKAR, BHAVAN, BEHIND NATRAJ HOTEL, AURANGABAD ROAD, AHMEDNAGAR vs. KANHUR PATHAR MULTI STATE CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY MARYADIT KANHUR, KANHUR DIST. AHMEDNAGAR

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

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

b) Interest received from Nationalised/Private Bank is Rs 1241531/-. However, it is noted that the AO has disallowed deduction on this interest income under both the relevant sections viz. 80P(2)(a)(i) as well as 80P(2)(d).Thus, the only issue arising for determination in these grounds of appeal is whether the deduction u/s 80P (u/s 80P

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, AHMEDNAGAR., AHMEDNAGAR vs. KANHUR PATHAR MULTI STATE CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY MARYADIT , KANHUR, KANHUR DIST. AHMEDNAGAR

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

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

b) Interest received from Nationalised/Private Bank is Rs 1241531/-. However, it is noted that the AO has disallowed deduction on this interest income under both the relevant sections viz. 80P(2)(a)(i) as well as 80P(2)(d).Thus, the only issue arising for determination in these grounds of appeal is whether the deduction u/s 80P (u/s 80P

RIL NMD EMP CO. OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. ,RAIGAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS liability would increase business income of assessee-society which\nwas eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i), deduction under\nsection 80P(2)(a)(i) to be allowed on profit as enhanced by sum disallowed\nunder section 40(a)(ia) of the Act.\n8. In light of the factual matrix of the case and legal position

TULAI NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT TULJAPUR,OSMANABAD vs. ITO WARD 1 LATUR, LATUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in not condoning delay in filing of appeal. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld.Assessing Officer is erred in disallowing the deduction U/s 80P of Rs.6,43,237/- 3. The appellant craves the permission to add, amend

MANDHESHWARI URBAN DEVELOPMENT CO-OP BANK LTD,,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -1,, SOLAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

80P(2)(a)(i).” 10. In the present case also, the provisions of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act provides that the members includes nominal members and, therefore, we do not see any reason as to why the exemption under clause (v) of sub-section (3) of section 194A of the Act cannot be given in the case of members referred

SOLAPUR SIDDESHWAR SAHAKARI BANK ,SOLAPUR vs. ASST . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE -2, SOLAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

80P(2)(a)(i).” 10. In the present case also, the provisions of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act provides that the members includes nominal members and, therefore, we do not see any reason as to why the exemption under clause (v) of sub-section (3) of section 194A of the Act cannot be given in the case of members referred

SOLAPUR JANATA SAHAKARI BANK LTD,,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, SOLAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

80P(2)(a)(i).” 10. In the present case also, the provisions of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act provides that the members includes nominal members and, therefore, we do not see any reason as to why the exemption under clause (v) of sub-section (3) of section 194A of the Act cannot be given in the case of members referred

SOLAPUR SIDDESHWAR SAHAKARI BANK LTD ,SOLAPUR vs. ASST . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE -1 , SOLAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

80P(2)(a)(i).” 10. In the present case also, the provisions of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act provides that the members includes nominal members and, therefore, we do not see any reason as to why the exemption under clause (v) of sub-section (3) of section 194A of the Act cannot be given in the case of members referred

SAMARTH SAHAKARI BANK LTD ,SOLAPUR vs. ASST . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE - 2 , SOLAPUR, SOLAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

80P(2)(a)(i).” 10. In the present case also, the provisions of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act provides that the members includes nominal members and, therefore, we do not see any reason as to why the exemption under clause (v) of sub-section (3) of section 194A of the Act cannot be given in the case of members referred

VYAPARI SAHAKARI BANK MARYADIT,SOLAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(4), SOLAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

80P(2)(a)(i).” 10. In the present case also, the provisions of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act provides that the members includes nominal members and, therefore, we do not see any reason as to why the exemption under clause (v) of sub-section (3) of section 194A of the Act cannot be given in the case of members referred

SOLAPUR JANATA SAHAKARI BANK LTD,PUNE vs. ACIT., CIR-2, SOLAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

80P(2)(a)(i).” 10. In the present case also, the provisions of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act provides that the members includes nominal members and, therefore, we do not see any reason as to why the exemption under clause (v) of sub-section (3) of section 194A of the Act cannot be given in the case of members referred

SOLAPUR JANATA SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD - 2(4), SOLAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

80P(2)(a)(i).” 10. In the present case also, the provisions of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act provides that the members includes nominal members and, therefore, we do not see any reason as to why the exemption under clause (v) of sub-section (3) of section 194A of the Act cannot be given in the case of members referred