ITO, PUNE vs. THEGOVERNMENTSERVENTSMAHARASTRACO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are\ndismissed

iv) the purchase of agricultural implements, seeds,\nlivestock or other articles intended for agriculture for\nthe purpose of supplying them to its members, or\n(v) the processing, without the aid of power, of the\nagricultural produce of its members, or\n(vi) the collective disposal of the labour of its members, or\n(vii) fishing or allied activities, that

ITO, PUNE vs. THE GOVERNMENT SERVENTS MAHARASHTRA CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are\ndismissed

iv) the purchase of agricultural implements, seeds,\nlivestock or other articles intended for agriculture for\nthe purpose of supplying them to its members, or\n(v) the processing, without the aid of power, of the\nagricultural produce of its members, or\n(vi) the collective disposal of the labour of its members, or\n(vii) fishing or allied activities, that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-12 PUNE, PUNE vs. JANATA GRAHAK MADHYAWARTI SAHKARI SANGH MARYADIT, PUNE

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

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

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act, to the total income of Rs.1,54,81,910/- returned by the assessee u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act vide his order dated 26.05.2023. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) in para 5.4 of his appellate order observed that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-12 PUNE, PUNE vs. JANATA GRAHAK MADHYAWARTI SAHKARI SANGH MARYADIT, PUNE

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

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

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act, to the total income of Rs.1,54,81,910/- returned by the assessee u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act vide his order dated 26.05.2023. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) in para 5.4 of his appellate order observed that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 12 PUNE, PUNE vs. JANATA GRAHAK MADHYAWARTI SAHKARI SANGH MARYADIT, PUNE

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

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

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act, to the total income of Rs.1,54,81,910/- returned by the assessee u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act vide his order dated 26.05.2023. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) in para 5.4 of his appellate order observed that

VIJAY VYANKATRAO MANE,SADASHIV PEATH vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER , ADDL/JCIT(A)- CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

194A of the Act. disallowance is required to be made as per section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Therefore, the assessing Officer is directed to allow the interest expenditure after making verification of applicability of TDS provisions on interest and after making disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, if required. Accordingly, the Ground

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

iv) Section 80P(4) excludes the applicability of deduction under section 80P. altogether to any co-operative bank and to exclude the normal banking business income from deduction u/s 80P. v) The words used in Section 80P(4) "in relation to", can include within its ambit and scope the interest income earned by any co-operative society from

KUDALE AGRO FOODS,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-14, PUNE, PUNE

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

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

iv) M/s Religare Finvest Ltd. which was debited to the profit and loss account of the 2 ITA No.1619/PUN/2024, AY 2017-18 assessee. However, the assessee has not deducted TDS on the interest paid to these four NBFCs. The Ld. AO, therefore, issued a show cause notice dated 14.12.2019 asking the assessee as to why the interest paid

RAJESH MOHANLAL BORA,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (1),, NASHIK

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1609/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Rajesh Mohanlal Bora, 401, Rushiraj House, Thatte Nagar, College Road, Nashik – 422 005 Pan : Abcpb5526F . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Ito Ward- 1(1) Nashik . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा/ Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 03/10/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 20/12/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Of The Assessee Is Assailed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nashik [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 23/08/2019 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”] Which Dove Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 29/12/2016 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By Income Tax Officer 1(1), Nashik [For Short “Ao”] For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2014-15. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 8

3) of the Act by Income Tax Officer 1(1), Nashik [for short “AO”] for the assessment year [for short “AY”] 2014-15. ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 8 Rajesh Mohanlal Bora, ITA No. 1609/PUN/2019 AY: 2014-15 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are; 2.1 The assessee is an individual filed his return of income [for short

R&DE (ENGRS) EMPLOYEES CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 7(3), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowed to which the assessee did not file any objection. The Ld. AO after considering the part reply of the assessee, for the reasons recorded in para 3.6 of the assessment order and relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Co- operative Sale Society Vs. ITO reported in (2010) 188 Taxman

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, AHMEDNAGAR., AHMEDNAGAR vs. KANHUR PATHAR MULTI STATE CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY MARYADIT , KANHUR, KANHUR DIST. AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

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

iv) Vide Finance Act 2015, the amendment to section 194A(3)(v) have excluded Co- Operative Bank from Co-operative society to deduct TDS u/s194A on interest paid to member thereof. Thus, the legislative intent is to distinguish co-operative banks from co- operative societies for the purpose of benefits u/s 80P as held by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, AHMEDNAGAR., AAYAKAR, BHAVAN, BEHIND NATRAJ HOTEL, AURANGABAD ROAD, AHMEDNAGAR vs. KANHUR PATHAR MULTI STATE CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY MARYADIT KANHUR, KANHUR DIST. AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

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

iv) Vide Finance Act 2015, the amendment to section 194A(3)(v) have excluded Co- Operative Bank from Co-operative society to deduct TDS u/s194A on interest paid to member thereof. Thus, the legislative intent is to distinguish co-operative banks from co- operative societies for the purpose of benefits u/s 80P as held by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court

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

disallowed the\ndeduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80P(2)(a)(i)/80P(2)(d) of the Act\namounting to Rs.3,04,88,392/- treating the same as other income'.\nAccordingly, the Ld. AO completed the assessment on 28.09.2021 u/s\n143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act by making an addition of Rs.3,04,88,392/- as\nincome from other sources

SANJAY DIGAMBAR MALVE.,,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2755/Pun/2016 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Sanjay Digambar Malve, The Dcit, Circle-1, Nashik. Plot No.2, Suvarnamudra Vs Bungalow, Mate Nursery Road, Sawarkar Nagar, Opp. Vishwas Bank, Nashik. Pan: Aftpm 5169 A Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee Assessee By Shri Sanket Milind Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe - Dr Date Of Hearing 09/03/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 05/05/2022 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(Appeals)-1, Nashik Dated 09.09.2016For The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Advances Of Rs.13,61,710/- Received By The Assessee From The Company, M/S. Kamal Infrabuild Pvt. Ltd. Should Be Treated As Deemed Dividend U/S 2(22)(E) In The Hands Of The Assessee. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Assessee Was Holding A Running Account With The Above Company & For A Major Part Of The Year, The Assessee Had Advanced Amounts To The Company & Hence, The Advances Received By The Assessee For A Short Period During The Year Were In Consideration Of The Advances Given By The Assessee To Company During The Rest Of The Year & Hence, The Provisions Of Section 2(22)(E) Were Not Applicable To The Instant Case. 3. Without Prejudice To The Above Ground, The Assessee Submits That If At All Any Addition Is To Be Made U/S 2(22)(E), Then The Accumulated Profits Of The Company As On 01.04.2011 Should Be Considered For

194A in respect of the payments made to the above credit co-operative society which was engaged in the business of banking and hence, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) was not justified. 6. Without prejudice to the above ground, the assessee submits that the amendment to section 40(a)(ia) by introducing the second proviso was retrospective in nature

PRABHAKAR MANJAJI THAKRE vs. PRINCIPOAL C.I.T.-1, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Assessment Year : 2011-12

iv) The appellant craves to leave, add, amend, alter, substitute, and modify the above grounds of appeal, if necessary on the basis of written submissions and personal presentation to be made at the time of hearing.” 2. The assessee has also raised the following additional grounds of appeal. 1) On the facts and circumstances of the case