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

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

condonation petition without giving due weight to the genuine reasons for delay, which warranted indulgence in the interest of justice. 1.3 BECAUSE such approach disregarded the orders of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 03.03.2025 and the consequential order giving effect thereto dated 20.05.2025, which had already upheld the assessee's entitlement to Section 80P deduction

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

condonation petition without giving due weight to the genuine reasons for delay, which warranted indulgence in the interest of justice. 1.3 BECAUSE such approach disregarded the orders of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 03.03.2025 and the consequential order giving effect thereto dated 20.05.2025, which had already upheld the assessee's entitlement to Section 80P deduction

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

4) \"in relation to\", can include within its\nambit and scope the interest income earned by any co-operative society\nfrom a co-operative bank; and thus deny the applicability of deduction u/s\n80P altogether, on interest income earned from such co-operative banks\nalso.\n6\nITA Nos.2070 & 2071/PUN/2024,\nAYS 2018-19 & 2021-221\nvi) The amendment of Section 194A

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

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

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

condonation petition\nwithout giving due weight to the genuine reasons for delay, which\nwarranted indulgence in the interest of justice.\n1.3 BECAUSE such approach disregarded the orders of the CIT(A),\nNFAC, Delhi dated 03.03.2025 and the consequential order giving\neffect thereto dated 20.05.2025, which had already upheld the\nassessee's entitlement to Section 80P deduction

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

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

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

section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act is not allowable if the funds are not invested for business purpose or with a co- operative society in order to further the object of availing such a deduction. Further, in light of the Supreme Court decision which directly concerns the issue at hand, the reliance of the appellant on the decision

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

4) of 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

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, AHMEDNAGAR vs. KRUSHI VIDNYAN PRADHYAPAK SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT, AHMEDNAGAR

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

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

section 80P wherein it is clearly stated that interest income earned only from primary agricultural credit society or a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank are eligible for deduction u/s.80P of the IT Act. 3 I.T.A.No.701/PUN./2023 4. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in not considering

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

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

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

section 80P(2)(a)(i) deduction claim of Rs.1,54,52,445/- representing interest income from Co-operative banks; in the course of assessment dated 16.09.2022 as held in the lower appellate discussion. 4. Mr. Nayak vehemently supported the impugned disallowance that the same has been rightly made in the assessee’s hands since it has not derived the interest

KARISHMA CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2, PUNE

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos.1 & 2/Pun/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 Karishma Co-Op Housing Pr.Commissioner Of Income Society Ltd., Vs Tax-2, Pune. Near Sangam Press, Karve . Road, Kothrud, Pune – 411038. Pan: Aaaak 9772 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod Shingte – Ar Revenue By Shri Sunil Kumar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: These Assessee’S Twin Appeals For The A.Y.2016-17 & 2017- 18 Arise Against The Pr.Cit-2, Pune’S Separate Orders, Passed In Case No.Pn/Pcit-2/263/2020-21/1084, Pn/Pcit-2/263/2020-21/1085, Both Dated 10.12.2020, Respectively, Involving Proceedings Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act [In Short “The Act”].

section 80P(2)(d) deduction claim raised on interest income derived from deposits made in co-operative banks, is hardly res- integra as the tribunal’s co-ordinate Bench in ITA No.1249/PUN/2018 Rana SSK Ltd. Vs. PCIT decided on 07.01.2022 has declined Revenue’s identical arguments as follows: “2. Briefly stated, the assessee which is a cooperative society had efiled

KARISHMA CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2, PUNE

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos.1 & 2/Pun/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 Karishma Co-Op Housing Pr.Commissioner Of Income Society Ltd., Vs Tax-2, Pune. Near Sangam Press, Karve . Road, Kothrud, Pune – 411038. Pan: Aaaak 9772 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod Shingte – Ar Revenue By Shri Sunil Kumar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: These Assessee’S Twin Appeals For The A.Y.2016-17 & 2017- 18 Arise Against The Pr.Cit-2, Pune’S Separate Orders, Passed In Case No.Pn/Pcit-2/263/2020-21/1084, Pn/Pcit-2/263/2020-21/1085, Both Dated 10.12.2020, Respectively, Involving Proceedings Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act [In Short “The Act”].

section 80P(2)(d) deduction claim raised on interest income derived from deposits made in co-operative banks, is hardly res- integra as the tribunal’s co-ordinate Bench in ITA No.1249/PUN/2018 Rana SSK Ltd. Vs. PCIT decided on 07.01.2022 has declined Revenue’s identical arguments as follows: “2. Briefly stated, the assessee which is a cooperative society had efiled

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

MAHATMA PHULE GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,,SOLAPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, PUNE, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

section 80P deduction in light of CIT Vs. Totgars Co-op. Sale Society Ltd. (2017) 392 ITR 74 (Karnataka) to buttress the point that on such interest income derived from surplus funds parked in a co-operative bank does not qualify for the instant deduction. 6. We have given thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival submissions and find no substance