INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. KESHAVSMURTI NAGARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LTD.,, RAIGAD

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.936/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ward 5, Panvel …. Vs. Keshavsmurti Nagari Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd., Shop No.1G/F, Anpurna Niwas, Shivaji Road, Tal – Panvel, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Dist – Raigad – 410206 Pan: Aaaak7390L प्रत्याक्षेप सं./Co No.30/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 (Out Of Ita No.936/Pun/2015) Keshavsmurti Nagari Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd., Shop No.1G/F, Anpurna Niwas, Shivaji Road, Tal – Panvel, … प्रत्याक्षेऩक/ Cross Objector Dist – Raigad – 410206 Pan: Aaaak7390L Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 5, Panvel

4) of the Act, had declined to extend the benefit of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The interest income earned on short term deposits and from saving banks account was held liable to income tax. The Hon‟ble High Court held that where the assessee society was providing credit facilities to its members

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

4) of the Act. Although, in all fairness, we may herein observe that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Totagars co-operative Sale Society (2017) 395 ITR 611 (Karn), as had been relied upon by the ld. D.R before us, had held, thataco-operative society would not be entitled to claim 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) of the Act.\nAlthough, in all fairness, we may herein observe that the\nHon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. CIT Vs.\nTotagars co-operative Sale Society (2017) 395 ITR 611\n(Karn), as had been relied upon by the ld. D.R before us,\nhad held, thataco-operative society would not be entitled to\nclaim

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]

4) …………... (5) Where the assessee fails to make a claim in his return of income for any deduction under section 10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this Chapter under the heading "C.—Deductions in respect of certain incomes", no deduction shall be allowed to him thereunder

AJINKYA MADHYAMIK SHIKSHAK SEVAK SAH. PATSANSTHA, MARYADIT,SATARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SATARA, SATARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

68 taxтапп.com 298 (Kerala),\nthe Kerala High Court held that a return filed by assessee\nbeyond period stipulated under section 139(1) or 139(4) or\nunder section 142(1) or section 148 can also be accepted and\nacted upon for entertaining claim raised under section 80P

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

68 and the Hon'ble\nKolkata High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Southern Eastern Employees\nCooperative Credit Society Ltd. 390 ITR 524 took a view that the income\narising on the surplus invested in short term deposits and securities cannot\nbe attributed to the activities of the society and, therefore, not eligible for\nexemption u/s.80P

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), NASHIK, NASHIK vs. MICO EMPLOYEES CREDIT COOP SOCIETY LTD., NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

4) (with effect from 01.04.2007) that denies the benefit of section 80P to cooperative banks. However, the larger principle that income from investment activity is ‘attributable to’ the business activity of banking and hence covered by section 80P(2)(a)(i) is very much applicable to this case. The CBDT Circular 18/2015 reiterates the Supreme Court decision

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

68) (ii) Karnataka High Court in Totgars Co-operative Sale Society (2017, 395 ITR 611) (iii) Gujarat High Court in State Bank of India (2016, 389 ITR 578) (iv) Punjab & Haryana High Court in Punjab State Co-op Development Bank (2016, 389 ITR 607) all of which have held that Interest income from Fixed Deposits was to be assessed

SHREE SHIV SAHYADRI NAGARI SAHAKARI PATHSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 7(3) PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1788/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shree Shiv Sahyadri Nagari V The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Pathanstha S Ward-7(3), Pune. Maryadit, Sai Park Road, Dighi, Pune – 411015. Pan: Aaeas1417N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Deepak Sasar – Ar Revenue By Smt. Shabana Parveen – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 06/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/11/2024 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 28.06.2024 For A.Y.2019-20. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Ld.Cit(A) Has Wrongly Confirmed The Disallowance Of Deduction Of Rs.15,60,115/- Claimed By The Appellant U/S.80P(2)(A)(I) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Alternatively, The Interest Income Earned By The Appellant From The Investments In A Co-Operative Bank Is Also Eligible For Deduction Under Section 80P(2)(D) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Appellant Crave Leave To Add, Delete, Amend, Alter, Vary And/Or Withdraw All Or Any One Of The Above Grounds Of Appeal.”

68 taxmann.com 298 (Kerala), the Kerala High Court held that a return filed by assessee beyond period stipulated under section 139(1) or 139(4) or under section 142(1) or section 148 can also be accepted and acted upon for entertaining claim raised under section 80P

SHAHUPURI VYAPARI NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA LTD KOLHAPUR,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), KOLHAPUR

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

68,730/-; there is hardly any dispute that the same represents interest derived from various co-operative societies/banks. It is found that the instant issue is no more res 2 ITA.No.216/PUN./2024 integra in light of this tribunal’s recent coordinate bench’s order ITA.No.1249/PUN./2018 dated 07.01.2022 in The Rena Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. vs. PCIT

M/S DHULE NANDURBAR DISTRICT POLICE CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY,DHULE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, DHULE, DHULE

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

68,547/- and Rs.1,33,961/- made by Assessing Officer in the assessment order(s) dated 28.11.2019 and 24.03.2021, for 2 ITA.Nos.194 & 195/PUN./2024 assessment years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019, respectively, representing interest income from the investments made in co- operative/scheduled bank(s). The same is found to be no more res integra in light of this tribunal

M/S DHULE NANDURBAR DISTRICT POLICE CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY,DHULE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, DHULE, DHULE

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

68,547/- and Rs.1,33,961/- made by Assessing Officer in the assessment order(s) dated 28.11.2019 and 24.03.2021, for 2 ITA.Nos.194 & 195/PUN./2024 assessment years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019, respectively, representing interest income from the investments made in co- operative/scheduled bank(s). The same is found to be no more res integra in light of this tribunal

SHREE TULJABHAVANI NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -5 , PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.254/Pun/2020 िनधा"रणवष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Tuljabhavani Nagari The Principal Commissioner Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Vs Of Income Tax - 5, Pune. 17/04, 103, Shri Tuljibhavani Plaza Mangalnagar, Wakad Road, Thergaon, Pune. Pan: Aadas 9902 P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Dr Date Of Hearing 16/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 28/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr.Dipak P.Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Pr.Commissioner Of Income-Tax-5, Pune’S, Order Dated 08.01.2019For The Assessment Year 2014-15, Involving Proceedings Under Section 263(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax Has Erred In Passing The Order Which Is Without Jurisdiction & Bad In Law. Same May Please Be Cancelled. 2. Pr.Cit Has Erred In Alleging That Order U/S 143(3) Passed By Assessing Officer Is Erroneous In So Far As It Is Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. Appellant Prays To Cancel The Same.

4. The short point of view of the ld. Pr.CIT is that interest earned from co-operative banks cannot be covered under clause (d) of sub-clause (2) of section 80P. Section 80P(1) provides that: 'Where, in the case of an assessee being a co-operative society, the gross total income includes any income referred

KAI FAKIRA JAIRAM PATIL SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT SHAHADA,NANDURBAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, DHULE, DHULE

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

section 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest income earned by a cooperative society from the cooperative bank. There is a cleavage of judicial opinion among several High Courts on the issue of eligibility of this kind of income for exemption u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case

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 :

80P(2)(d) of the IT Act was not justified. 3. The Appellate craves the right to add, amend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, delete any or all grounds of the appeal, if deemed necessary at the time of hearing of the appeal.” Delay : 1.1 There is a delay of 157 days in filing appeal before this Tribunal. We have perused

PUNE ZILHA MADHYAWARTI SAHAKARI BANK SEVAKANCHI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. PR. CTI -3, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1086/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2021-22

68,150/- and concluded the assessment. 4. Subsequently, ld. PCIT examined the assessment record and under the provisions of section 263 of the Act issued a show cause notice to the assessee on 18.02.2025 and main issues raised therein is that (1) assessee is not entitled for deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act for the interest income from

SIDHESHWAR SAH. SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD.,AURANGABAD vs. DCIT, S.R.-2,, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and Revenue are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

80P is misplaced. Such provision states that : ` The provisions of this section shall not apply in relation to any co-operative bank other than a primary agricultural credit society or a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank.’ As the assessee under consideration is not a Co-operative Bank, the mandate of subsection (4) does not extend

SHRI DUDHGANGA VEDGANGA SAH: SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. ACIT, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and Revenue are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

80P is misplaced. Such provision states that : ` The provisions of this section shall not apply in relation to any co-operative bank other than a primary agricultural credit society or a primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank.’ As the assessee under consideration is not a Co-operative Bank, the mandate of subsection (4) does not extend