Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
The ITAT held that the assessee bank was eligible for deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) for its rural branches. The Assessing Officer had erroneously rejected the rural branch status for five branches based on district-wise data from the 2011 Census. However, the assessee appropriately relied on the final village-wise data from the 2001 Census to claim the deduction, as the 2011 Census lacked village-level population figures. The ITAT found no error in the impugned appellate order allowing the deduction and dismissed the revenue's appeal.
The ITAT held that the assessee bank was eligible for deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) for its rural branches. The Assessing Officer had erroneously rejected the rural branch status for five branches based on district-wise data from the 2011 Census. However, the assessee appropriately relied on the final village-wise data from the 2001 Census to claim the deduction, as the 2011 Census lacked village-level population figures. The ITAT found no error in the impugned appellate order allowing the deduction and dismissed the revenue's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.