INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 PANDHARPUR, INCOME TAX OFFICE PANDHARPUR vs. YASHODA MAHILA NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA , MANGALWEDHA DISTRICT SOLAPUR

delay on the part of\nthe assessee in filing of the present appeal before us, therefore, the\nsame merits to be condoned.\n5. On merits, it was submitted by the Ld. A.R. that the A.O\nwhile framing the assessment had after making necessary\nverification taken a plausible view, therefore, the Pr. CIT had\nexceeded his jurisdiction by seeking to review

KOLHAPUR ZILLA KRISHI KARMACHARI SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 2(1) , KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

80P of the Act. The penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act was initiated simultaneously for under reporting of income. Pursuant thereto, show cause penalty notice(s) were issued on the e-mail of the assessee along with service through designated verification unit, which was duly delivered. The assessee failed to offer any explanation in response to the said show

BLUE RIDGE UNIT B TOWER 9 TO 14,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-2(4),PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.2385, 2386 & 2387/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Blue Ridge Unit B Tower 9 Vs The Income Tax Officer, To 14 Co-Operative Housiong Ward-2(4), Pune. Society Ltd., Unit B Society Office, Rajiv Gandhi It Park, Phase I, Hinjewadi, Pune – 411057. Maharashtra. Pan: Aacab2693P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ms.Ayesha Ansari & Shri Sandesh Ps – Ar’S Revenue By Shri Harish Bist – Addl.Cit(Through Virtual Hearing) Date Of Hearing 01/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Bunch Of Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 All Dated 26.08.2024 Emanating From The Separate Assessment Orders Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S

Section 80P Deduction for AY 2018-19. 1.1 BECAUSE the Ld. CIT(A) failed to adjudicate the appeal on merits and restricted the decision solely to the delay condonation

BLUE RIDGE UNIT B TOWER 9 TO 14,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-2(4),PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.2385, 2386 & 2387/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Blue Ridge Unit B Tower 9 Vs The Income Tax Officer, To 14 Co-Operative Housiong Ward-2(4), Pune. Society Ltd., Unit B Society Office, Rajiv Gandhi It Park, Phase I, Hinjewadi, Pune – 411057. Maharashtra. Pan: Aacab2693P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ms.Ayesha Ansari & Shri Sandesh Ps – Ar’S Revenue By Shri Harish Bist – Addl.Cit(Through Virtual Hearing) Date Of Hearing 01/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Bunch Of Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 All Dated 26.08.2024 Emanating From The Separate Assessment Orders Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S

Section 80P Deduction for AY 2018-19. 1.1 BECAUSE the Ld. CIT(A) failed to adjudicate the appeal on merits and restricted the decision solely to the delay condonation

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

section 119, condone the delay in order to avoid undue hardship. 8. In the present case it cannot be said that the delay was, in any manner, mala fide. On the contrary, the assessee was vigilant enough to file the return at the midnight. We, therefore, condone the delay in filing the return

NASHIK DISTRICT PRIMARY TEACHERS CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 1(1), NASHIK

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

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

section 80P(2)(d) is being furtherance of the co-operative movement as a whole. The relevant para 35 is hereby reproduced: "...Eighthly, sub-clause (d) also points in the same direction, in that interest or dividend income derived by a co-operative society from investments with other co-operative societies, are also entitled to deduct the whole of such

SOLAPUR DIST M S K SAMITI H MASTER T AND N T PATH MYDT PANDHARPUR,PANDHARPUR vs. ITO, WARD 2, PANDHARPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.804/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Solapur Dist M S K Samiti H The Income Tax Officer, Master T & N T Path V Ward-2, Pandharapur. Mydtpandharpur, S 3980, Station Road, Pandharpur. Maharashtra – 413304. Pan: Aanas9890E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 08/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal 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 Dated 11.05.2023 Emanating From Assessment Order Dated 30.07.2019Passed Under Section 144 R.W.S 144A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Assessee Was In Presumption That Co Operative Societies Income Is Exempt Under 80P Generally Maximum Co Solapur Dist M S K Samiti H Master T & N T Path Mydt Pandharpur [A]

condoned, 2. The provisions of Section 8OA (5) of the Act are directory and not mandatory and therefore deduction under Section MOP cannot be denied by making the provision section 80A (5) of the Act We relied upon decision of ITAT Delhi in case of the Fibre fill Engineers Vs. CIT (2017) 177 TTJ 556 (Del.) wherein it was held

HAVELI TALUKA VEEJ KAMGAR SAHAKARI PATHSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6 (1) PUNE, PMT BUILDING, SWARGATE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

delay on the part of the assessee in filing of the present\nappeal before us, therefore, the same merits to be condoned.\n5. On merits, it was submitted by the ld. A.R, that as the A.O\nwhile framing the assessment had after making necessary\nverifications taken a plausible view, therefore, the Pr. CIT had\nexceeded his jurisdiction by seeking

WARVANDI VIVIDH KARYAKARI SEVASAHAKARI SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 2,, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

section 80P. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the ld.NFAC with a delay of 90 days. The appellant society filed explanation praying for condonation

BLUE RIDGE UNIT B TOWER 9 TO 14,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-2(4),PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Section 80P Deduction for AY 2018-19.\n1.1 BECAUSE the Ld. CIT(A) failed to adjudicate the appeal on\nmerits and restricted the decision solely to the delay condonation

NASHIK DISTRICT PRIMARY TEACHERS CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 1(1), NASHIK

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

section 80P(2)(d) is being furtherance of the co-operative\nmovement as a whole. The relevant para 35 is hereby reproduced:\n\"...Eighthly, sub-clause (d) also points in the same direction, in that interest\nor dividend income derived by a co-operative society from investments with\nother co-operative societies, are also entitled to deduct the whole

S T CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 5(1), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2136/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 S T Co-Operative Credit V The Income Tax Officer, Society, S Ward-5(1), Pune. Swargate S T Depo, Veer Savarkar Nagar, Swargate Bus Stand, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aabas6856L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Dr Date Of Hearing 13/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 09.08.2024 For A.Y.2020-21. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Appellant By Refusing To Condone The Delay Of 108 Days In Filing The Appeal Without Appreciating That The Said Delay Was Due To Reasonable Cause As Explained In The Application For Condonation Of Delay Filed Before Cit(A) & Therefore, The Said Delay Ought To Have Been Condoned In The Interest Of Justice & The Appeal Should Have Been Adjudicated On Merits. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Ought To Have Appreciated That The Deduction U/S 80P Was Allowable In Respect Of Interest Earned From Deposits Made By Cooperative Banks As Consistently Held By Honorable

80P was allowable in respect of interest earned from deposits made by cooperative banks as consistently held by Honorable ITAT, Pune and the considerations of merits, should not have been altogether ignored, while adjudicating the aspect of condonation of delay in filing appeal and hence, the appeal ought to have been allowed after condoning the delay 3. The appellant craves

MALEGAON MAHANAGAR PALIKA KARMCHARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE, MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 1 MALEGAON, MALEGAON, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: MS.ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)

section 80P(2)(d) of the Act, therefore, the reasoning given by the lower authorities on this issue cannot be accepted. Therefore, I direct the Assessing Officer to allow deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest income earned from 7 cooperative bank/scheduled bank. Thus, the ground of appeal filed by the assessee stands

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES EMP CO. OP. CHS,RAIGAD vs. ITO WARD 4, PANVEL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 80P(2)(a) of the Act. However, ld.AO denied the exemption. Aggrieved by the same, assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A), which was delayed by 48 days. The Assessee had filed a condonation

THE SATARA DCC BANK STAFF CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,SATARA vs. ACIT, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.633/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Satara Dcc Bank Staff V The Asst. Commissioner Co-Op Credit Society Ltd., S. Of Income Tax, Satara S.No.523 A/1, Vijay Circle, Satara. Millenium, Shop No.2, Satara, Maharashtra – 415001. Pan: Aaaat0953G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ms. Renuka Arunrao Ghatge Fca– Ar Revenue By Shri Vinodpawar,Irs – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 07/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commssioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act, 1961, For The A.Y.2018-19, Dated 06.02.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Id. Nfac-Cit (A), Delhi, Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Assessing Officer (A.O.) In Making Addition Of Rs. 93,91,184/- On

section 80P(2)(d) of The Act should be allowed to interest income on investments in co-operative banks. 3. The Id. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in dismissing the appeal as non-maintainable without condoning the delay

GANGAGIRI MAHARAJ BETSARALA MAHILA NAGARI PATSANSTHA LTD,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 1(1), NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

80P merely because a valid ITR for A.Y.2017-18 was not filed by the assessee. 5] The appellant craves leave to add/ alter/ amend any of the grounds of appeal. 3. Registry has informed that there is delay of 455 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed application for condonation of delay stating that assessee relied

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

condone the delay in filing of the appeal and admit the same for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. The learned CIT erred in law and on facts in initiating the proceedings u/s 263 of the IT Act, 1961, without appreciating the fact that the assessment order is not erroneous and prejudicial

PRAKASHCHAND JAIN MULTI STATE CO.OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,JAMNER vs. ITO WARD 1(4), JALGAON, JALGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1791, 1801 & 1802/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2020-21, 2014-15 & 2018-19 The Prakashchand Jain Multi V The Income Tax Officer, State Co-Operative Credit S Ward-1(4), Jalgaon. Society Ltd., Mayur Complex, Bajrangpura Road, Jamner, Jalgaon – 424206. Pan: Aaaap4677K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Vinay Kawdia – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Bunch Of Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21 Dated 10.07.2024, A.Y.2014-15 & A.Y.2018-19 Dated 09.07.2024 Respectively. Since The Issue Involved Is Common & Facts Are Identical, All The Three Appeals

section 80P(2)(a) of the Act. Ld.AR further submitted that there was a delay in filing appeal before the ld.CIT(A) of 145 days. Ld.AR submitted that an elaborate reasoning has been given by the Assessee in Form No.35 and requested the ld.CIT(A) to condone