BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

134 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 80P(2)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai178Pune134Chennai131Cochin116Bangalore108Panaji53Kolkata31Ahmedabad29Nagpur25Jaipur25Visakhapatnam19Hyderabad19Lucknow19Rajkot12Surat12Chandigarh12Delhi11Indore11Raipur9Patna4Jabalpur2Guwahati1SC1Amritsar1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 80P(2)(d)279Section 80P192Section 80P(2)(a)117Section 143(3)114Deduction97Section 26340Section 25038Addition to Income31Disallowance28

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA vs. SHRI SIDDHANATH NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYA DAHIWADI, MAN,SATARA

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

ITA 1801/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: \nDepartment by
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 2(19)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest\n/dividend received by a co-operative society from its investments in another co-\noperative society. He relied on the following decisions :\na. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of Surat Vankar Sahakari Sangh Ltd. Vs\nACIT (421 ITR 134).\nb. Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in case of PCIT vs Totagurs

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA vs. SHRI SIDDHANATH NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYA DAHIWADI, TAL. MAN SATARA

Showing 1–20 of 134 · Page 1 of 7

Revision u/s 26327
Condonation of Delay18
Section 143(2)14

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

ITA 1800/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: \nShri R.C. DoshiFor Respondent: \nShri S. Sadananda Singh
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 2(19)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest\n/dividend received by a co-operative society from its investments in another co-\noperative society. He relied on the following decisions :\na. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of Surat Vankar Sahakari Sangh Ltd. Vs\nACIT (421 ITR 134).\nb. Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in case of PCIT vs Totagurs

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

ITA 2741/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

80P(2)(a)(i) or deduction u/s\n80P(2)(d) of the IT Act was decided in favour of various\ncooperative credit societies. The decisions referred by Ld. AR are\nas follows :-\n1. ANNAPURNA NAGARI SAHKARI PATHSANSHTHA MARYADIT,\nITA No.2741/PUN/2024 dated 24.03.2025.\n2. N Sai Multi State Cooperative Credit Society Ltd, ITA\nNo.1109/PUN/2024 dated 24.09.2024.\n3. Swa Ashokrao Bankar Nagari

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

ITA 2070/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: ShriSanket JoshiFor Respondent: ShriRamnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

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

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

ITA 1428/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jan 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nDepartment by
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

section, medical shops, lodging, plying\nand hiring of goods and carriage etc. It was in that background\nof the facts that the Hon'ble High Court held that the assessee\ncould not claim deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act. When we\nconsider the impact of this decision, it turns out that the same\nis not germane to case under

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

ITA 2071/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: \nShriSanket JoshiFor Respondent: \nShriRamnath P. Murkunde
Section 144Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

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

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

ITA 1338/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

80P(2)(d), had therein rendered his order as erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the Pr.CIT not finding favour with the reply of the assessee, wherein the latter had tried to impress upon him that it was duly eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act, therein “set aside

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

ITA 1858/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Rajpurohit
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

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

SHRIKRUPA NAGARI SAHAKARI PATHSANSTHA MARYADIT,ALIBAUG vs. INCOME TAX WARD 3 PANVEL, PANVEL

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

ITA 1089/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Ronak H. JainFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

section 80P(2)(d) of the Act is eligible in respect of Interest received from the Co-Operative Banks. 2 3) The appellant craves leave to add and or alter any of the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a Co-operative credit society

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, AHMEDNAGAR., AHMEDNAGAR vs. GORESHWAR GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT , PARNER, GOREGAON, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 630/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Smt. Payal RathiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

80P(2)(d), had therein rendered his order as erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the Pr.CIT not finding favour with the reply of the assessee, wherein the latter had tried to impress upon him that it was duly eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act, therein “set aside

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

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 853/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 250Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

80P(2)(d), had therein rendered his order as erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the Pr.CIT not finding favour with the reply of the assessee, wherein the latter had tried to impress upon him that it was duly eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act, therein “set aside

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

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 942/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

80P(2)(d), had therein rendered his order as erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the Pr.CIT not finding favour with the reply of the assessee, wherein the latter had tried to impress upon him that it was duly eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act, therein

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

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 261/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

80P(2)(d), had therein rendered his order as erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the Pr.CIT not finding favour with the reply of the assessee, wherein the latter had tried to impress upon him that it was duly eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act, therein “set aside

SHREE GUDALESHWAR GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAH PAT SANSHTA MARYADIT, GUDAL,RADHANAGARI, KOLHAPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 (1), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 406/PUN/2024[A.Y. 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri A.S. NaikFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest received on short term deposit kept with the co-operative bank. The appellant is entitled to deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) in respect of the interest income earned on fixed deposits kept with the co-operative Banks. The appellant prays that the ITO be directed to allow the deduction of Rs.76

SATARA ZILLA GRAMSEVAK SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADIT,SATARA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1446/PUN/2023[20018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2024

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri G.D.Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1446/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Satara Zilla Gramsevak Sahakari The Pcit-3, Pune. Patpedhi Maryadit, Vs 161/B/4, Zilla Gramsevak . Bhavan, Shahunagar, Satara – 415001. Pan: Aacas8773K Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari – Dr Date Of Hearing 18/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23/01/2024

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

80P(2)(d), had therein rendered his order as erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the Pr.CIT not finding favour with the reply of the assessee, wherein the latter had tried to impress upon him that it was duly eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act, therein “set aside

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

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1414/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

condoning the delay. 2. (a) Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned AO has erred in disallowing the deduction of Rs.33,23,274/- under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (Act) without appreciating the fact that the appellant is a registered co-operative society engaged in business of providing

N.D.A. EMPLOYEES CO. OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITEDS,N.D.A. CAMPUS KHADAKWASALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , PMT BUILDING PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1689/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Satish NadeFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Rajpurohit, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(i)

80P(2)(d), had therein rendered his order as erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the Pr.CIT not finding favour with the reply of the assessee, wherein the latter had tried to impress upon him that it was duly eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act, therein

LAKE TOWN CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2), PUNE, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed for

ITA 88/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

80P(2)(d), had therein rendered his order as erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the Pr.CIT not finding favour with the reply of the assessee, wherein the latter had tried to impress upon him that it was duly eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act, therein “set aside

SHREE GUDALESHWAR GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAH PAT SANSHTA MARYADIT, GUDAL,RADHANAGARI, KOLHAPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 (1), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

ITA 405/PUN/2024[A.Y.2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri A.S. NaikFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest received on short term deposit kept with the co-operative bank. The appellant is entitled to deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) in respect of the interest income earned on fixed deposits kept with the co-operative Banks. The appellant prays that the ITO be directed to allow the deduction of Rs.76

MAHESH NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA LIMITED,AHMEDNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, AHMEDNAGAR

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1140/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(i)

80P(2)(d), had therein rendered his order as erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the Pr.CIT not finding favour with the reply of the assessee, wherein the latter had tried to impress upon him that it was duly eligible for claim of deduction under Sec.80P(2)(d) of the Act, therein “set aside