Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 97618 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.