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

B”, PUNE\nBEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT\nAND\nSHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nआपकी अपील सं. / ITA No.2741/PUN/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2022-23\nITO, Ward-1, Pandharpur. Vs. Yashoda Mahila Nagari\nSahakari Patsanstha,\nTaluka- Mangalwedha,\nDist- Solapur-413305,\nPAN: AAAAAY7354C\nAppellant\nRespondent\nRevenue by\nAssessee by\nShri Arvind Desai\nShri Girish Ladda\nDate of hearing\nDate

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

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

b) Thus to sum up, it was held by the Honourable Supreme Court that deduction u/s 80P(2)(a) is to be given to all cooperative societies, even if they provide non-agricultural loans to its members. c) However, it has also held that deduction cannot be given on the profits and gains attributable to credit facilities given

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

delay on the partof the\nassessee in filing of the present appeal before us,therefore, the\nsame merits to be condoned.\n5.\nOn merits, it was submitted by the ld.A.R, that as the А.О\nwhile framing the assessment had after making necessary\nverifications taken a plausible view, therefore, the Pr. CIT had\nexceeded his jurisdiction by seeking to review

CHANDRAPRABHU GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,SOLAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, PANDHARPUR, PANDHARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. The Ld. AO has erred in (CIT-A erred in confirming) making the disallowance of claim of Rs.38,19,685/- u/s 80P(2)(a)(i)/80P(2)(d) of the IT Act. 2 ITA No.1858/PUN/2024, AY 2018-19 2

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)

B. Phadke and Manakchand L Baheti – AR’s Revenue by Shri Ratnakar Shelake – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 02/01/2025 Date of pronouncement 08/01/2025 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(Appeal)[NFAC] passed u/sec.250 of the Income tax Act, 1961, for the A.Y.2020-21

MAHARAJA MULTI STATE CO OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,SATARA vs. ITO, WARD 3, SATARA, SATARA

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

delay on 9 ITA.No.942/PUN./2024 the part of the assessee in filing of the present appeal before us, therefore, the same merits to be condoned. 5. On merits, it was submitted by the ld. A.R, that as the A.O while framing the assessment had after making necessary verifications taken a plausible view, therefore, the Pr. CIT had exceeded

INCOME TAX OFFICER , INCOME TAX OFFICE PANDHARPUR vs. DHANSHREE MAHILA GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA LTD, MANGALWEDHA

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

delay on the part of the assessee in filing of the present appeal before us, therefore, the same merits to be condoned. 5. On merits, it was submitted by the ld. A.R, that as the A.O while framing the assessment had after making necessary verifications taken a plausible view, therefore, the Pr. CIT had exceeded his jurisdiction by seeking

SAMARTH NAGARI SHAKARI PATH SANSTHA MARYADIT,PARBHANI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD ONE, JALNA

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

b) Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO has order u/s 143(3) erred in stating that the deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) is only available to the Primary Agriculture Credit Society(PACS) whereas in the section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act no such reference to ’'agriculture" or PACS

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

SANGRAM NAGARI SAHAKARI PATHSANSTHA MARYADIT ,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

delay on the part of the assessee in filing of the present appeal before us, therefore, the same merits to be condoned. 5. On merits, it was submitted by the ld. A.R, that as the A.O while framing the assessment had after making necessary verifications taken a plausible view, therefore, the Pr. CIT had exceeded his jurisdiction by seeking

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

80P of the Act to the assessee under 143(1)(a)(v) proceedings (A.Y. 2019-20) on account of delay in filing of the return by 4 minutes and 42 seconds. 4 9. Referring to the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. M/s. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd. vide ITA No.2147/MUM/2018 and Lodha

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

condone the delay on technical ground that the appellant failed to provide any supporting documentary evidence or any admissible reason to substantiate the claim of sufficient cause, though, it was very well explained before Id. CIT (A) and there is a resonable cause which has prevented in filing the appeal belatedly, thus the delay was not deliberate or as result

SHRIMANT BABASAHEB DESHMUKH MULTI STATE DAIRY CO-OP LTD,,SANGLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3),, SANGLI

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2215/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15

b), to the society for the reason that Society has supplied the Milk collected from its members to Federal Society as well as to Private parties. Alternatively, your appellant would like to raise the following ground : 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the lower authorities erred in denying the deduction of Rs.27

M/S. SHRIMAN BABASAHEB DESHMUKH MULTI STATE CO-OP DIARY LTD,,SANGLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3),, SANGLI

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2215/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15

b), to the society for the reason that Society has supplied the Milk collected from its members to Federal Society as well as to Private parties. Alternatively, your appellant would like to raise the following ground : 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the lower authorities erred in denying the deduction of Rs.27

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

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

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SANGLI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. SHIVPRATAP NAGARI COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, VITA DIST-SANGLI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHREE G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1338/PUN/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Income Tax Officer, Shiv Pratap Nagari Cooperative Ward – 2, Sangli Credit Society Limited, Vs. Lengare Road, Vita, Tal-Khanapur, Sangli PAN : AABAS08891I अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : N O N E Department

SHREE SANT SAVTA GRAMIN BIGAR SETI SAHAKARI PATHSANSTA MARAYADIT,NASHIK vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1625/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shree Sant Savta Gramin Bigar V Assessment Unit, Seti Sahakari Pathsanstha S. Income Tax Department, Maryadit, Delhi. Pimpalgaon, Niphad, Nashik – 422209. Pan: Aacas4098M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Dayanand Jawalikar – Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 14/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2017-18, Dated 27.11.2024 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act, Dated 15.12.2019. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Delay is condoned. 2. At the outset of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. No adjournment letter or written submission filed. Basic facts of the case : 3. The assessee society has filed return of its income on 31/10/2017 declaring total income of Rs.NIL after claiming deduction of Rs.26,28,869/- u/s.80P of the Act. The case