<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1992 (1) TMI 153 - ITAT CUTTACK</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62488</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A) that the income declared by the co-operative society was not earned through the collective disposal of its members&#039; labor, disqualifying it from exemption under Section 80P(2)(a)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The society&#039;s use of sub-contractors and outside labor was deemed ineligible for the exemption. The Tribunal rejected the application of the principle of res judicata in income tax proceedings and allowed referencing the Finance Minister&#039;s speech for understanding statutory provisions but affirmed that it cannot be used for interpreting the law directly. The appeal was dismissed, supporting the CIT(A)&#039;s ruling.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:40:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=100934" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (1) TMI 153 - ITAT CUTTACK</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62488</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A) that the income declared by the co-operative society was not earned through the collective disposal of its members&#039; labor, disqualifying it from exemption under Section 80P(2)(a)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The society&#039;s use of sub-contractors and outside labor was deemed ineligible for the exemption. The Tribunal rejected the application of the principle of res judicata in income tax proceedings and allowed referencing the Finance Minister&#039;s speech for understanding statutory provisions but affirmed that it cannot be used for interpreting the law directly. The appeal was dismissed, supporting the CIT(A)&#039;s ruling.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62488</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>