SANGAM SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADITNAGARI,NAVI MUMBAI, THANE vs. MUMBAI-W-91, VASHI NAVIMUMBAI

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 Sangam Sahakari Patpedhi Mumbai-W-91, Maryaditnagari, Navi Mumbai, It-Office, Vashi Railway Station Office No. 227, Central Facility Vs. Building Navi Mumbai-400703. Building, 3Rd Floor, Sector-19, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai-400705. Pan No. Aacas 6296 B Appellant Respondent

section 80P(4) of the Act. 6.8 Now, the question is confined to single point as Now, the question is confined to single point as to whether the to whether the appellant has derived its interest income from the party falling in the first appellant has derived its interest income from the party falling in the first appellant has derived

ITO 15(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. SHIVRAJ SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT, MUMBAI

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amarjit Singhिनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./5268/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Income Tax Officer-15(2)(4) M/S. Shivraj Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit Matru Mandir, Room No.111, Grant S.S. Sanstha Maryadit, Omkar Chs, Bldg. Road(W) Vs. No.32/934, Pant Nagar, Ghatkopar (E) Mumbai-400 007. Mumbai. Pan:Aaajs 2751 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Dr. A.K. Nayak-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: None सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/03/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 31.03.2017 लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार /Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 16/06/2014 Of The Cit (A)-26, Mumbai, The Assessing Officer (Ao) Has Filed The Present Appeal. Assessee, An Aop, Filed Its Return Of Income On 13/09/2010, Declaring Total Income At Rs. Nil, After Claiming Deduction U/S. 80P Of The Act, Amounting Rs. 44.50 Lakhs. The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S. 143 (3) Of The Act, On 28/03/2013, Determining Its Income At Rs. 44, 50, 811/-

capital of Rs. 95.70 lakhs, statutory reserves of Rs. 90.33 lakhs deposits of Rs.838.65 lakhs from members and other liabilities, that on the asset side it had balances with various scheduled and co-operative banks, investments in fixed deposits maintained with Co- Operative Banks and loan/advances, that it had received interest on loans of Rs. 1 59.85 lakhs (including penalty

ITO-26(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANGLI VAIBHAV CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

4) of the Act, deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act was allowable in respect of interest received by a co-operative society from a co-operative bank. 11.2. During the course of hearing strong reliance was placed by the Learned Departmental Representative on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Katlary

ITO-26(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANGLI VAIBHAV CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

4) of the Act, deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act was allowable in respect of interest received by a co-operative society from a co-operative bank. 11.2. During the course of hearing strong reliance was placed by the Learned Departmental Representative on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Katlary

ITO-26(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANGLI VAIBHAV CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

4) of the Act, deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act was allowable in respect of interest received by a co-operative society from a co-operative bank. 11.2. During the course of hearing strong reliance was placed by the Learned Departmental Representative on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Katlary

SADHANA SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LIMITED,VASAI, PALGHAR vs. CIT(A), NFAC , DELHI

4) of the Act, deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act was allowable in respect of interest received by a co-operative society from a co-operative bank. 10.2. During the course of hearing strong reliance was placed by the Learned Departmental Representative on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Katlary

SADHANA SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LIMITED,PALGHAR vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

4) of the Act, deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act was allowable in respect of interest received by a co-operative society from a co-operative bank. 10.2. During the course of hearing strong reliance was placed by the Learned Departmental Representative on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Katlary

BOMBAY CITY POSTAL CLERKS CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE PR. CIT-20, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: SMT BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

capital in an excess of rupees one lakh. It has been the Bombay City Postal Clearks Co.op. Credit Society Ltd. ;A. Y.2017-18 appellant's contention that the conditions No. (1) and (3) provided above are not satisfied. 10. Therefore the issue that arises for consideration is whether the appellant satisfies condition No.(1) and (3) above. The impugned order after