MAHATMA GANDHI NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MYDT UDGIR,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 1 -LATUR, LATUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

80P(2)(d) of\nthe Act?\"\nThat while holding the aforesaid issues in favour of the revenue\ndepartment, the Court followed the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme\nCourt in the case of same assessee which was later on followed by\nthis Court in the case of State Bank of India Vs. CIT, reported in\nMANU/GJ/1053/2016

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. KESHAVSMURTI NAGARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LTD.,, RAIGAD

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.936/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ward 5, Panvel …. Vs. Keshavsmurti Nagari Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd., Shop No.1G/F, Anpurna Niwas, Shivaji Road, Tal – Panvel, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Dist – Raigad – 410206 Pan: Aaaak7390L प्रत्याक्षेप सं./Co No.30/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 (Out Of Ita No.936/Pun/2015) Keshavsmurti Nagari Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd., Shop No.1G/F, Anpurna Niwas, Shivaji Road, Tal – Panvel, … प्रत्याक्षेऩक/ Cross Objector Dist – Raigad – 410206 Pan: Aaaak7390L Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 5, Panvel

gains which was not immediately required by the assessee for lending money to the members as there were no takers and hence, was deposited in the banks so as to earn interest, such interest income earned by the assessee was held to be attributable to carrying on the business and therefore, same was liable to be deducted in terms

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD – 3, SATARA vs. M/S. SHRI BHAIRAVNATH MULTISTATE COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, SATARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

section 80P (2) (d).The observation of the Tribunal is reproduced as under- “We have heard the rival submissions and perused the records. The scope of s. 8oP(2)(d) of the Act is to allow a deduction in the computation of total income of a Co-operative Society in respect of incomes earned by the society as enumerated

THE SANGLI SALARY EARNERS CO OP SOCIETY LTD,SANGLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3 SANGLI, SANGLI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2254/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-21 The Sangli Salary Earners Co V The Income Tax Officer, Op Society Ltd., S. Ward-3, Sangli. 1104 B, Harbhat Road, Main City, Sangli – 416416 Pan: Aaaat0980D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Amit Sudhir Shintre(Virtual) Revenue By Smt. Saumya Pandey Jain-Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 17/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21, Dated 27.08.2025 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S.143(3) Read With Section 143(3) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.09.2022. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Deduction U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) Relying On The Decision Of Totgars Co-

gains of business" attributable to the activity of banking/credit facilities and deductible u/s 80P(2)(a)(i). Considering the same entire addition of Interest income of Rs.3,71,88,591/- should be allowed as a deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act 2. Deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) and Inapplicability of Section 80P(4) Without prejudice

VAIBHAV NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT, NEAR SAWANT NIWAS, OPP. PANCHVATI THEATER,ICHALKARANJI,ICHALKARANJI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD NO. 1, VRINDAVAN COLONY, ASARA NAGAR, SANGLI ROAD, ICHALKARANJI, ICHALKARANJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1210/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Vaibhav Nagari Sah Pat V The Assessing Officer, Sanstha Maryadit, S Ward No.1, Ichalkaranji. 10/1280, Sawant Niwas, Opp.Panchvati Theter, Sangli Road, Ichalkaranji – 416115. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaaav0226E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Dayanand Jawalikar – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/06/2025

capital and operational funds in the normal course of business as a measure of commercial prudence, and the interest income thereon is directly attributable to the business activity of providing credit facilities to members. The lower authorities also ignored the principle of mutuality, which governs cooperative societies, and incorrectly assessed the income under the head "Income from Other Sources" instead

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(3),, PUNE vs. MAHARASHTRA BANK EMPLOYEES CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,, PUNE

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

gains which was not immediately required by the assessee for lending money to the members as there were no takers and hence, was deposited in the banks so as to earn interest, such interest income earned by the assessee was held to be attributable to carrying on the business and therefore, same was liable to be deducted in terms

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), NASHIK, NASHIK vs. MICO EMPLOYEES CREDIT COOP SOCIETY LTD., NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

gains of business attributable to the activity of carrying on the business of banking or providing credit facilities to its members by a cooperative society and is liable to be deducted from the gross total income under Section 80P of the Act. 4. Sec. 80P of the Act grants deduction in respect of various categories of income of a cooperative

MAHATMA GANDHI NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MYDT UDGIR,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 1 -LATUR, LATUR

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

80P(2)(d) of the Act?" That while holding the aforesaid issues in favour of the revenue department, the Court followed the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of same assessee which was later on followed by this Court in the case of State Bank of India Vs. ClT, reported in MANU/GJ/1053/2016

YASHWANT NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 10(1) PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Capital and Reserve of the assessee and based on the activities of the Assessee. No where neither the AO nor the CIT(A) has stated that the Assessee has received Banking License from RBI under the Banking Regulation Act. 5.3 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank

SHREE TULJABHAVANI NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -5 , PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.254/Pun/2020 िनधा"रणवष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Tuljabhavani Nagari The Principal Commissioner Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Vs Of Income Tax - 5, Pune. 17/04, 103, Shri Tuljibhavani Plaza Mangalnagar, Wakad Road, Thergaon, Pune. Pan: Aadas 9902 P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Dr Date Of Hearing 16/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 28/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr.Dipak P.Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Pr.Commissioner Of Income-Tax-5, Pune’S, Order Dated 08.01.2019For The Assessment Year 2014-15, Involving Proceedings Under Section 263(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax Has Erred In Passing The Order Which Is Without Jurisdiction & Bad In Law. Same May Please Be Cancelled. 2. Pr.Cit Has Erred In Alleging That Order U/S 143(3) Passed By Assessing Officer Is Erroneous In So Far As It Is Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. Appellant Prays To Cancel The Same.

2)(a)(i), the assessment completed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Income Tax Officer, Ward - 9(4), Pune, on 15.07.2016, for Assessment Year 2014-15, is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The disallowance made by the Assessing Office of Rs. 7,856/- in respect

DR JAGADALE MAMA HOSPITAL EMPLOYEES CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,,SOLAPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - 4, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Dr Jagadale Mama Hospital Vs. Pr.Cit-4, Pune Employees Coop Credit Society Ltd., Dhanaji Arjun Pawar Dr Jagadale Mama Hospital Employees Society, Shivaji Nagar Barshi Taluka Barshi, Solapur - 413401 Pan : Aaaad3228Q Appellant Respondent

2)(d). Hence, allowing of the deduction by the Assessing Officer under section 80P for the above amount is not as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In Para 10 of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-op Society

UMASA CHAVAN NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA,SOLAPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX: 4, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Umasa Chavan Nagari Sahakari Vs. Pr.Cit-4, Pune Patsanstha 267 46 Raviwar Peth, Solapur – 413005 Pan : Aaabu0049D Appellant Respondent

2)(d). Hence, allowing of the deduction by the Assessing Officer under section 80P for the above amount is not as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In Para 10 of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-op Society

SHRI SHARAD GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAHAKARI PATASANSTHA LTD.,,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -4,, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshaliनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Sharad Gramin Bigar Sheti Vs. Pr.Cit-4, Pune Sahakari Pathasanstha Ltd., Sharad Sankul, Malegaon (Bk), Tal. Baramati, Dist. Pune – 413102 Pan : Aabas6680G Appellant Respondent

2)(d). Hence, allowing of the deduction by the Assessing Officer under section 80P for the above amount is not as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In Para 10 of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-op Society

DHANASHREE MULTISTATE CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,,SOLAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, PNADHARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

80P (1) Where, in the case of an assessee being a cooperative society, the gross total income includes any income referred to in subsection (2), there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section, the sums specified in subsection (2), in computing the total income of the assessee. (2) The sums referred

SWAMI VIVEKANAND STATE CO.OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,,SOLAPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX: 4, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Swami Vivekanand Multi State Vs. Pr.Cit-4, Pune Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd. 658/659, Near Janta Bank, Main Road, Akkalkot, Dist. Solapur - 413216 Pan : Aaias3245A Appellant Respondent

2)(d). The Assessing Officer has not caused any verification of this issue. 8. The submissions made by the assessee Society are examined in detail. a. The Assessment record has been verified in detail and the submissions stated to have seen made regarding the Deposits made with different banks are seen to have been given without details as to when

LEKHAKOSH KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI SANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. PR. CIT, PUNE-4, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

2)(d). Hence, allowing of the deduction by the Assessing Officer under section 80P for the above amount is not as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In Para 10 of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-op Society

SHARADCHANDRA NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 10(1), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1068/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sharadchandra Nagari Sahakari V The Income Tax Officer, Patsanstha Maryadit, S Ward-10(1), Pune. At Post–Rajuri, Taluka–Junnar, Dist. Pune – 412411. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaabs1016L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Abhay Avachat – Ar Revenue By Shri Dayanand Jawalikar – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/06/2025

capital and reserve of the Assessee are not less than One Lakh Rupees. According to Assessing Officer, Assessee’s primary object was profiteering. 3.2 However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., vs. CIT 431 ITR 1 (SC) has observed that the entity which has got banking license issued by Reserve Bank

SINDHUDURGA ZILLA MADHYAMIK ADHYAPAK VA UCCHYA MADHYAMIK SHIKSHAK VA SHIKSHAKETAR KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADIT,,SINDHUDURG vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

80P(2)(a)(i) held that the assessee eligible for such deduction. The Hon‟ble High Court while allowing the claim of assessee has also distinguished the ratio laid down by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Totgars, Co- operative Sale Society Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer (supra). The Hon‟ble Court held that interest income earned