1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Earlier order recalled for AY 2011-12; rectification allowed due to mistake apparent; s.80P(2)(d) deduction reconsidered</h1> ITAT recalled its earlier order for AY 2011-12 and allowed the assessee's rectification application, finding an inadvertent failure to apply the ratio of ... Rectification application - denial of Deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) - interest income from cooperative banks - HELD THAT:- The applicant stated that Tribunal has failed to apply the ratio of the Honβble Supreme Court and the Jurisdictional High Court and same is amount to mistake apparent on record. We find that inadvertently judgment cited by the applicant was not considered and we find same inadvertent mistake apparent on record. In view of the above, we recall order for Assessment Year 2011-12. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Assessee is allowed. Appeal in ITA No. 2100/Ahd/2014 (AY 2011-12) originally dismissed; grounds 3-5 challenged disallowance under section 80P(2)(d) of Rs.72,39,179 relating to interest income from cooperative banks. Earlier bench had followed a prior ITAT decision and the Karnataka High Court decision in PCIT v. Totgars Co-operative Sale Society, holding that deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) 'is not allowable to the appellant.' Applicant contended the Tribunal failed to apply the ratio of the Supreme Court and the jurisdictional High Court, amounting to a 'mistake apparent on record.' Tribunal found that a cited judgment was inadvertently not considered and accepted that this omission was a mistake apparent on record. Consequently the Tribunal recalled its order dated 10.09.2018 in ITA No. 2100/Ahd/2014 for AY 2011-12 and allowed the Miscellaneous Application, thereby restoring the matter for fresh consideration.