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

b) ……….. (c) ……….. 2(d): In respect of any income by way of interest or dividends derived by the co-operative society from its investments with any other co-operative society, the whole of such income; 5. Sub-sec. (4) of Sec. 80P has withdrawn the deduction to the co operative bank other than primary agricultural credit society or a primary

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

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(2

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(2

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

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

THE SHI vs. AMARTH MULTISTATE CO. OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,SATARAVS.ITO WARD 1, SATARA, SATARA

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.188/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Shivsamarth Multistate Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Satara. Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., House No.211, Matoshree Krupa, Back Side, Talmavale High School, Patan, Satara- 415103. Pan : Aadat3637N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kishor B. Phadke Revenue By : Shri A. K. Mahala Date Of Hearing : 24.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.05.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 08.12.2023 Passed By Ld Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Learned Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac); Erred In Law & On Facts In Passing An Appellate Order Without

TDS on Audit fees payment & Rent payment was also made. We find that the definition of member as per Maharashtra State Cooperative Societies Act includes nominal members also & therefore the interest earned from nominal members also covered under business income which qualifies for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the IT Act. It is also observed that during

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)

TDS return. The main objective of this scheme is to culture the habit of saving in to the members of the society. Now, as per pigmy deposit scheme norms, members cannot withdraw such deposited amount till the expiry of six month from the date of deposits and if any members withdraw cash before end of six month from date

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, 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

RIDDHI SIDDHI MAHILA NAGARI CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD, KARAD,KARAD vs. CIT (APPEALS), DELHI

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2216/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Riddhi Siddhi Mahila Nagari Vs. Assessment Unit, Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd., Income Tax Department. Palkar House, 157, Guruwar Peth, Shri Vitthal Chouk, Karad- 415110. Pan : Aacar0958D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vijaykumar N. Kashirsagar Revenue By : Shri Vinod Pawar (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.08.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Primary Credit Co-Operative Society Engaged In The Business Of Providing Credit Facilities To Its Members & Also In Accepting Deposits From Them. On The Basis Of Information That The Assessee Has Made One Time Deposit Of Rs.5,95,522/- & Tds Of More Than Rs.7,72,686/-

B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2216/PUN/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Riddhi Siddhi Mahila Nagari Vs. Assessment Unit, Co-op. Credit Society Ltd., Income Tax Department. Palkar House, 157, Guruwar Peth, Shri Vitthal Chouk, Karad- 415110. PAN : AACAR0958D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Vijaykumar

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

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 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