Co-operative investment deductions and additional depreciation claims remain available where own-fund investment and plant-use requirements are met.

Deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) was available for interest and dividend income from investments with co-operative banks and societies where the assessee's own interest-free funds exceeded its investments. The notes also state that the unclaimed balance of additional depreciation on new machinery used for less than 180 days in the acquisition year could be claimed in the immediately succeeding year. Milk cans and related equipment integral to milk-processing and cattle-feed operations were treated as plant and machinery, making them eligible for normal and additional depreciation. The appellate authority's allowance of these deductions and depreciation claims was described as sustainable.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether deduction for interest and dividend income from investments with co-operative banks and societies was allowable; (ii) Whether the unclaimed balance of additional depreciation on new machinery used for less than 180 days in the preceding year was allowable in the succeeding year; (iii) Whether milk cans and related equipment constituted plant and machinery eligible for depreciation and additional depreciation.

Issue (i): Whether deduction for interest and dividend income from investments with co-operative banks and societies was allowable.

Analysis: The assessee's interest-free capital, reserves and surplus exceeded its investments in shares, deposits and securities. The investments were therefore presumed to have been made from own funds. The income was undisputedly derived from investments with co-operative societies and co-operative banks, and the issue had also been decided in the assessee's favour in earlier years.

Conclusion: Deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) was allowable on the interest and dividend income. The finding is in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the unclaimed balance of additional depreciation on new machinery used for less than 180 days in the preceding year was allowable in the succeeding year.

Analysis: The third proviso permits the balance additional depreciation where eligible machinery was put to use for less than 180 days in the year of acquisition. The assessee's entitlement to the balance claim was also supported by prior decisions in its own case and by the Department's subsequent acceptance of the same claim.

Conclusion: The balance additional depreciation was allowable in the immediate succeeding year. The finding is in favour of the assessee.

Issue (iii): Whether milk cans and related equipment constituted plant and machinery eligible for depreciation and additional depreciation.

Analysis: The milk cans and equipment formed integral components of the assessee's milk-processing and cattle-feed operations. Having been treated as plant for normal depreciation, no separate basis existed to deny additional depreciation. The issue was governed by earlier orders in the assessee's own case.

Conclusion: Milk cans and related equipment constituted plant and machinery eligible for depreciation and additional depreciation. The finding is in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The deductions and depreciation claims allowed by the appellate authority for all assessment years remained sustainable.

---