DHARESHWAR SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. ,VILLAGE: - DHARESHWAR, TALUKA: - RAJULA, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139(4) of the Act. Therefore, the rejection of return cannot be the criteria. The Ld. AR further submitted that the debatable issue in respect of pima facie adjustment cannot be taken into account by disallowing

AMRUTPUR SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI LTD.,VILLAGE: - AMRUTPUR TALUKA DHARI, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139(4) of the Act. Therefore, the rejection of return cannot be the criteria. The Ld. AR further submitted that the debatable issue in respect of pima facie adjustment cannot be taken into account by disallowing

AMBARADI SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI LTD.,AMBARADI , DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT(CPC), BANGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139(4) of the Act. Therefore, the rejection of return cannot be the criteria. The Ld. AR further submitted that the debatable issue in respect of pima facie adjustment cannot be taken into account by disallowing

SHREE SANALIYA SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD.,LITAL MOTALILIYA SANALIYA, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, all the 4 appeals are allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139(4) of the Act. Therefore, the rejection of return cannot be the criteria. The Ld. AR further submitted that the debatable issue in respect of pima facie adjustment cannot be taken into account by disallowing

BATAVA DEVLI SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,BATAVA DEVLI, TAL. KUNLAVA, DIST. AMRELI. vs. THE ADIT, (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

disallowed in section 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act, especially in the fact that the scope of sub- clause (ii) has been specifically defined in section 143(1). As observed earlier, in our view, the scope of sub- clause (ii) of section 143(1)(a) does not cover delay in filing of return of income beyond the due prescribed

CHAKARGADH SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,CHAKARGADH SEVA, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT(CPC),, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

disallowance under the said provision and prima facie adjustment for late filing of return of income is not specifically included therein.It was held that that since return of income was filed within due date permissible under section 139(4

SHRI TRAMBAKPUR SAHAKARI MANDALI LIMITED,AT TRAMBAKPUR TALUKA DHARI DIST. AMRELI vs. THE DCIT/ACIT (CPC),, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 139(1) of the Act. 4. The assessee filed appeal against the order of Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed assessee’s appeal with the following observations: “5. DECISION: 5.1 All the grounds of appeal are related to the solitary issue of disallowance

DAHIDA SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LIMITED ,VILLAGE: - DAHIDA, DIST.:- AMRELI vs. THE ADIT (CPC), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

139(1) of the Act. Further there was an amendment in section 143(1)(a)(v) in the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021 such disallowances is possible under the 143(1) proceedings only from the Assessment Year 2022-23. I.T.A Nos. 269, 276 & 277/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2019-20 Page No 4

ALIUDEPUR SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LIMITED,ALIUDEPUR VILLAGE, TALUKA LATHI, DIST.: - AMRELI-365430 vs. THE ADIT (CPC), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

139(1) of the Act. Further there was an amendment in section 143(1)(a)(v) in the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021 such disallowances is possible under the 143(1) proceedings only from the Assessment Year 2022-23. I.T.A Nos. 269, 276 & 277/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2019-20 Page No 4

SHREE ANTALIYA KHETI VIKAS KARYAKARI SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LIMITED,LILIYA MOTA, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE ADIT (CPC), BANGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

139(1) of the Act. Further there was an amendment in section 143(1)(a)(v) in the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021 such disallowances is possible under the 143(1) proceedings only from the Assessment Year 2022-23. I.T.A Nos. 269, 276 & 277/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2019-20 Page No 4

SHREE LUNIDHAR SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI LTD.,LUNIDHAR, TALUKA KUNKAVAV, DIST. AMRELI. vs. ASSESSING OFFICER (CPC), , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

disallowance of deduction claimed under any of the provisions of Chapter VI-A under the heading "C.— Deductions in respect of certain incomes" (which includes deduction under section 80P of the Act), can be made if the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139. This amendment has been introduced w.e.f

SHRI NAVA UJALA SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LIMITED,AT NAVA UJALA, TALUKA KUNKAVAV, GUIJARAT-365450 vs. THE DCIT/ACIT(CPC),, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 139(1) of the Act. 4. The assessee filed appeal against the order of Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed assessee’s appeal with the following observations: “5. DECISION: 5.1 All the grounds of appeal are related to the solitary issue of disallowance

DHAR SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,DHAR, TALUKA: - SAVARKUNDLA, DIST. AMRELI-GUJARAT. vs. THE DCIT(CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowing deduction of Rs. 5,13,568/- claimed by the Appellant under various sub-sections of Sec. 80P of the Act as per return of income filed for the year. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and withdraw appeal anytime up to the hearing of this appeal. Total Tax Effect Rs. 1,58,695/-” I.T.A No. 33/Rjt/2022

MEDI SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,MEDI, DIST. AMRELI vs. THE ADIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowing deduction of Rs. 5,52,154/- claimed by the Appellant under various sub-sections of Sec. 80P of the Act as per return of income filed for the year. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and withdraw any ground of appeal anytime up to the hearing of this appeal. Total Tax Effect

THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

disallowed assessee’s claim under section 80IA of the Act. “2. The assessee company is a Government Contractor doing mainly Government work on contractual basis. Copies of P&L account and balance sheet, which were filed originally with the return filed u/s. 139(1) of the Act were also filed. Various issues were discussed at length. On perusal of details

CLASSIC NETWORKS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

disallowed assessee’s claim under section 80IA of the Act. “2. The assessee company is a Government Contractor doing mainly Government work on contractual basis. Copies of P&L account and balance sheet, which were filed originally with the return filed u/s. 139(1) of the Act were also filed. Various issues were discussed at length. On perusal of details

THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

disallowed assessee’s claim under section 80IA of the Act. “2. The assessee company is a Government Contractor doing mainly Government work on contractual basis. Copies of P&L account and balance sheet, which were filed originally with the return filed u/s. 139(1) of the Act were also filed. Various issues were discussed at length. On perusal of details

CLASSIC NETWORKS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR.2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07

disallowed assessee’s claim under section 80IA of the Act. “2. The assessee company is a Government Contractor doing mainly Government work on contractual basis. Copies of P&L account and balance sheet, which were filed originally with the return filed u/s. 139(1) of the Act were also filed. Various issues were discussed at length. On perusal of details