Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
ITAT held that interest income from deposits and investments with co-operative banks qualifies for deduction under s.80P(2)(d), as co-operative banks are, in substance, co-operative societies. Following consistent judicial precedent, ITAT ruled the assessee is legally entitled to claim such deduction. However, since necessary documentary details were not produced before the lower authorities, ITAT did not grant the deduction outright. Instead, ITAT remanded the matter to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to examine the evidentiary details to be furnished by the assessee, after affording adequate opportunity of hearing, and directed that, if the factual claim is found correct, the deduction under s.80P(2)(d) shall be allowed accordingly.
ITAT held that interest income from deposits and investments with co-operative banks qualifies for deduction under s.80P(2)(d), as co-operative banks are, in substance, co-operative societies. Following consistent judicial precedent, ITAT ruled the assessee is legally entitled to claim such deduction. However, since necessary documentary details were not produced before the lower authorities, ITAT did not grant the deduction outright. Instead, ITAT remanded the matter to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to examine the evidentiary details to be furnished by the assessee, after affording adequate opportunity of hearing, and directed that, if the factual claim is found correct, the deduction under s.80P(2)(d) shall be allowed accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
