Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal upholds AO's assessment under Section 80P(2)(d)</h1> <h3>The Sasme Co-Op. Society Ltd Versus The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-2.</h3> The Sasme Co-Op. Society Ltd Versus The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-2. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Jurisdiction of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act.2. Validity of invoking Section 263 on issues already examined by the Assessing Officer (AO).3. Eligibility of the assessee for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act.4. Prejudicial impact on revenue and erroneous nature of the AO's order.Detailed Analysis:1. Jurisdiction of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act:The appeal by the assessee challenges the jurisdiction of the PCIT under Section 263. The PCIT issued a show cause notice and revised the assessment order, claiming that the interest income earned by the assessee on deposits with cooperative banks does not qualify for exemption under Section 80P(2)(d). The PCIT held that the AO’s order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.2. Validity of invoking Section 263 on issues already examined by the Assessing Officer (AO):The assessee argued that the AO had already examined the issue of deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) during the assessment process. The AO issued statutory notices and considered the assessee's responses before allowing the deduction. The assessee contended that the PCIT cannot invoke Section 263 to take a different view on the same matter. The Tribunal agreed, noting that the AO had made sufficient inquiries and taken a reasonable view, thus the order was not erroneous.3. Eligibility of the assessee for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act:The assessee, a cooperative society, claimed a deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) for interest income earned from deposits with cooperative banks. The Tribunal examined various case laws and concluded that cooperative banks are considered cooperative societies. Therefore, interest income from deposits with cooperative banks is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d). This view was supported by decisions from the Gujarat High Court and the Rajkot Tribunal.4. Prejudicial impact on revenue and erroneous nature of the AO's order:The PCIT argued that the AO’s order allowing the deduction was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, referencing the Karnataka High Court's decision in the Totagars case. However, the Tribunal emphasized that when there are conflicting decisions from non-jurisdictional High Courts, the jurisdictional High Court's decision prevails. The Gujarat High Court had ruled in favor of allowing the deduction under Section 80P(2)(d), making the AO’s order neither erroneous nor prejudicial to revenue.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the AO's order was not erroneous and the conditions for invoking Section 263 were not met. The appeal by the assessee was allowed, and the PCIT's revision order was set aside. The Tribunal's decision was based on the principle that the AO had made a reasonable and permissible decision after sufficient inquiry, supported by binding precedents from the jurisdictional High Court.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found