INCOME TAX OFFICER, BHIMAVARAM vs. THE YENDAGANDHI LARGE SIZE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, YEDAGANDI

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.354/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21) Income Tax Officer - Ward - 1 V. The Yendagandhi Large Size Cooperative Society Limited Opp. Ganesh Canteen 4-16, Kk Road, Yendagandhi J.P. Road, Bhimavaram – 534202 West Godavari District – 534186 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aacat0967G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

disallowed the claim of deduction u/s.80P of the I.T Act made by the assessee, in the assessment order dated 12-09-2022, clearly stated that the DCCB has been issued license by RBI u/s. 22(1) r.w. 56(0) of the Banking Regulation Act dated 06.02.2012 and therefore, the DCCB being a bank cannot be considered

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS),, VIJAYAWADA vs. CARGO HANDLING PRIVATE WORKERS POOL TRUST,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

disallowed these expenditure on the ground that in absence of registration u/sec. 12A of the Act. 17. On appeal, ld. CIT(A) considered the same and held that these are the allowable expenses. We find that when the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order the assessee was not having 12A registration. Subsequently, on 22/05/2015 the ITAT in ITA No. 269/VIZ/2013

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS),, VIJAYAWADA vs. CARGO HANDLING PRIVATE WORKERS POOL TRUST,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

disallowed these expenditure on the ground that in absence of registration u/sec. 12A of the Act. 17. On appeal, ld. CIT(A) considered the same and held that these are the allowable expenses. We find that when the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order the assessee was not having 12A registration. Subsequently, on 22/05/2015 the ITAT in ITA No. 269/VIZ/2013

VARDHANAPU MANIKUMARI OF LATE EARNEST CHRISTOPHER VARDHANAPU,BHIMAVARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BHIMAVARAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.256/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15) Smt.Vardhanapu Manikumari Vs. Income Tax Officer L/R Of (Late) Earnest Christopher Ward-1 Vardhanapu Bhimavaram D.No.21-16-30A Dora Bangalow Mission Compound, West Godavari [Pan : Aeepv0600F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

section 56. Not being satisfied with the explanation offered by the assessee’s husband, the AO completed the assessment and passed order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 20.11.2018, by disallowing the amount of Rs.75,00,000/- as income from other sources u/s 56(2)(vii

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WRD-1, BHIMAVARAM vs. YENDANGANDHI LARGE SIZED CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.243/Viz/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Income Tax Officer Vs. M/S Yendagandhi Large Sized Ward-1 Co-Operative Society Ltd. Bhimavaram D.No.4-13, K.K.Road Yendagandi, West Godavari Dist [Pan : Aacat0967G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.01/Viz/2023 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.243/Viz/2022) (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) M/S Yendagandhi Large Sized Co- Income Tax Officer Operative Society Ltd. Ward-1 D.No.4-13, K.K.Road Bhimavaram Yendagandi, West Godavari Dist [Pan : Aacat0967G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Revenue By : Shri Madhukar Aves, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing 10.10.2023 : घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.11.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], National Faceless

56 of the Act. In response to the show cause letter and the draft assessment order, the assessee furnished it’s objections vide letter dated 01.02.2021, submitting that the District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. is also formed under the State Cooperative Societies Registration Act and all the primary agricultural cooperative credit societies like the assessee only are the members

INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SURENDRA NATH GUBBALA, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Us:

56,62,270/-, after treating the aforesaid amount of Rs. 9 crores as non-deductible. 7 ITA No.482/Viz/2024 & CO No.03/Viz/2025 Surendra Nath Gubbala 5. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). The assessee submitted before the CIT(A) that the property was encumbered under SARFAESI proceedings that were initiated by both banks, as the same

THE FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED,SRIKAKULAM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SRIKAKULAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.166/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) The Farmers Service Co-Operative Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-1, Srikakulam. Srikakulam. Pan: Aabtt4377L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri I. Kama Sastry, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 14/08/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

56,75,098/-. 3. The assessee craves leave to add to, alter modify, delete any of the above grounds of appeal.” 5. The only issue involved in this appeal relates to disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P of the Act. At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted 6 that the assessee society, being a cooperative society, make deposits in its regular

LANKAPALLI PACS LTD,LANKAPALLI VILLAGE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.364/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 ) Lankapalli Pacs Ltd, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 171, Lankapalli Village, Ward-1(1), Lankapalli Post, Vijayawada. Ghantasala Mandal-521131, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh-521131. Pan: Aaaal5410 (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri K. Siva Rama Kumar, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villurim, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/10/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 24/10/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

56 of the Act and cannot be categorized as ‘income from profits and gains of business’ of the assessee. The Ld. AO also observed that since the deduction U/s. 80P is available only for the profits and gains of the business of assessee ie., providing credit facilities to the members, the said deduction is not available to the interest income

THE VISAKHAPATNAM CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

56,70,500/- as amortized loss on account of the merger of Bobbili branch with the assessee. In the course of the assessment proceedings, the A.O. has asked the assessee what is the basis for the claim. Before the A.O., the assessee is not able to justify in respect of claim made by the company as per the provisions

THE VISAKHAPATNAM CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

56,70,500/- as amortized loss on account of the merger of Bobbili branch with the assessee. In the course of the assessment proceedings, the A.O. has asked the assessee what is the basis for the claim. Before the A.O., the assessee is not able to justify in respect of claim made by the company as per the provisions

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VISAKHAPATNAM CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

56,70,500/- as amortized loss on account of the merger of Bobbili branch with the assessee. In the course of the assessment proceedings, the A.O. has asked the assessee what is the basis for the claim. Before the A.O., the assessee is not able to justify in respect of claim made by the company as per the provisions

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE GUNTUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LIMITED,, TENALI

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for the assessment year 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.77 & 78/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Years:2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively) Acit Vs. The Guntur District Circle-1(1) Cooperative Central Bank Ltd. Guntur Tenali, Guntur [Pan : Aaatt6101H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

56, 62,325/- towards Premium' paid to LIC under 4 ITA Nos.77 & 78/Viz/2018 and CO Nos.27 & 28/Viz/2018 M/s Guntur District Coop Central Benk Ltd. Tenali 'Group Gratuity Scheme'. As per part 'C' to Schedule-TV of the Act, any such contributions should be under a scheme duly approved by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner of income Tax, for allowing

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, GUNTUR vs. THE GUNTUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LIMITED,, TENALI

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for the assessment year 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.77 & 78/Viz/2018 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Years:2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively) Acit Vs. The Guntur District Circle-1(1) Cooperative Central Bank Ltd. Guntur Tenali, Guntur [Pan : Aaatt6101H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

56, 62,325/- towards Premium' paid to LIC under 4 ITA Nos.77 & 78/Viz/2018 and CO Nos.27 & 28/Viz/2018 M/s Guntur District Coop Central Benk Ltd. Tenali 'Group Gratuity Scheme'. As per part 'C' to Schedule-TV of the Act, any such contributions should be under a scheme duly approved by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner of income Tax, for allowing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VIJAYAWADA vs. NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

2 & 3 stating that these expenditures arise in violation of Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002. Further, he also submitted that these expenditure were incurred in violation of the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act and Ld.CIT(A) has erred in holding that the provisions of section 40A(3) are not applicable. He therefore

NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

2 & 3 stating that these expenditures arise in violation of Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002. Further, he also submitted that these expenditure were incurred in violation of the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act and Ld.CIT(A) has erred in holding that the provisions of section 40A(3) are not applicable. He therefore

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VIJAYAWADA vs. NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

2 & 3 stating that these expenditures arise in violation of Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002. Further, he also submitted that these expenditure were incurred in violation of the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act and Ld.CIT(A) has erred in holding that the provisions of section 40A(3) are not applicable. He therefore

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VIJAYAWADA vs. NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

2 & 3 stating that these expenditures arise in violation of Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002. Further, he also submitted that these expenditure were incurred in violation of the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act and Ld.CIT(A) has erred in holding that the provisions of section 40A(3) are not applicable. He therefore

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VIJAYAWADA vs. NS HEALTHCARE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

2 & 3 stating that these expenditures arise in violation of Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002. Further, he also submitted that these expenditure were incurred in violation of the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act and Ld.CIT(A) has erred in holding that the provisions of section 40A(3) are not applicable. He therefore