AHMEDNAGAR ZILLA GRAMSEVAKANCHI SAHAKAR PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,AHILYANAGAR vs. PCIT, PUNE-1, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

4) to Sec. 80P would no more be entitled for claim of deduction under Sec. 80P of the Act,\nbut as a co-operative bank continues to be a co-operative society registered under the Co-operative\nSocieties Act, 1912 (2 of 1912), or under any other law for the time being in force in any State for the\nregistration

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

4) by the Finance Act,\n2006, which is in the nature of a proviso to the aforesaid\nprovision, it is made clear that such a deduction shall not be\nadmissible to a cooperative bank. However, if it is a primary\nagricultural credit society or a primary cooperative agricultural\nand rural development bank, the deduction would still be\nprovided. Thus, cooperative

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

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

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

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

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

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

4) by the Finance Act, 2006, which is in the nature of a proviso to the aforesaid provision, it is made clear that such a deduction shall not be admissible to a cooperative bank. However, if it is a primary agricultural credit society or a primary cooperative agricultural and rural development bank, the deduction would still be provided. Thus, cooperative

ARMED FORCES EX-OFFICERS MULTISERVICES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS NFAC, PUNE

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

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

capital gains amounting to INR 20,17,659/- twice while computing the income as per the assessment order under section 147 rws 144 rws 1448 dated 26 March 2022. Also, Tax credits such as TDS Advance and self- assessment tax paid for the has not been given while computing final tax liability. 3) The appellant craves leave to add, alter

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1) KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR vs. KOLHAPUR ZILHA MADHYAMIK SHIKSHAN SEVKANCHI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA , KOLHAPUR

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

capital, if not immediately required to be lent to the members, they cannot keep the said amount idle. If they deposit this amount in bank so as to earn interest, the said interest income is 6 ITA.Nos.29 & 30/PUN./2024 attributable to the profits and gains of the business of providing credit facilities to its members only. The society

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR vs. KOLHAPUR ZILHA MADHYAMIK SHIKSHAN SEVKANCHI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA, KOLHAPUR

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

capital, if not immediately required to be lent to the members, they cannot keep the said amount idle. If they deposit this amount in bank so as to earn interest, the said interest income is 6 ITA.Nos.29 & 30/PUN./2024 attributable to the profits and gains of the business of providing credit facilities to its members only. The society

SHARAD GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA LIMITED,NIRGUDSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 10(5). PUNE, AKURDI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.433 & 434/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sharad Gramin Bigarsheti V The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., S Ward-10(5), Pune. Sharad Gamin Bigarsheti Sanstha, Nirgoodsar, Pune – 412406. Maharashtra. Pan: Aabas8790H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Dhiraj S Dandgaval – Ar Revenue By Shri Rajesh Haladkar – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 26/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Both Dated 28.11.2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This

capital and surplus reserves and surpluses which are invested in banks other than mentioned in section 80P(2)(d). 10. The principle of mutuality cannot be invoked in the facts and circumstances of the case as the basic requirements of mutuality are missing. 11. The Appeal No. 100069 of 2016 dated 05-01-2017 in the case of Karnataka High

SHARAD GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA LIMITED,NIRGUDSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 10(5). PUNE, AKURDI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.433 & 434/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sharad Gramin Bigarsheti V The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd., S Ward-10(5), Pune. Sharad Gamin Bigarsheti Sanstha, Nirgoodsar, Pune – 412406. Maharashtra. Pan: Aabas8790H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Dhiraj S Dandgaval – Ar Revenue By Shri Rajesh Haladkar – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 26/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Both Dated 28.11.2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This

capital and surplus reserves and surpluses which are invested in banks other than mentioned in section 80P(2)(d). 10. The principle of mutuality cannot be invoked in the facts and circumstances of the case as the basic requirements of mutuality are missing. 11. The Appeal No. 100069 of 2016 dated 05-01-2017 in the case of Karnataka High

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SATARA vs. THE KARAD URBAN CO. OP. BANK LTD KARAD, KARAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

Capital Local Area Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT Jalandhar 82 taxmann.com 387 (Amritsar ITAT) 4. Yes Bank vs. ACIT 88 taxnmann.com 431 (Mumbai ITAT) 5. Caylon Bank vs. DCIT 31 taxmann.com 231 (Mumbai ITAT) 6. ACIT vs. Chatrapati Rajeshri Sahu Urban Co-op Bank Ltd. IT Appeal No. 798 of 2011 (ITAT- Pune) I have considered the assessment order

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

4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a employees' credit co-operative society and engaged in providing credit facilities to its members. For AY 2017-18, the assessee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs. Nil by claiming deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) of Rs.28

DIVYADATTA DIGAMBER NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA LIMITED SATARA,KOREGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SATARA

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED in above terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 651/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Divyadatta Digamber Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Moti Heights, Azaad Chowk, New St-Stand, Koregaon, Satara-415501 Pan: Aaeas1871L . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

capital gain had not been shown under schedule-CG of e-return filed by assessee, the co-ordinate bench held that ‘in the present system of e-filing of return which is totally dependent upon usage of software, it was possible that some clerical errors may occur at the time of entering the data in the electronic ITR/form, such errors/mistakes