<?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>2015 (1) TMI 867 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255668</link>
    <description>A co-operative society&#039;s eligibility for deduction under section 80P turned on whether its activities and bye-laws made it a primary co-operative bank under section 80P(4); applying the Banking Regulation Act definitions, the Tribunal treated it as excluded from section 80P and rejected the mutuality plea. On deductions for bad and doubtful debts, it held that section 36(1)(viia) relief is available only within the statutory limits and found no basis for further relief beyond what was already allowed. For reserve for overdue interest on borrowings, the Tribunal found no error in the lower authority&#039;s restricted treatment and denied any additional deduction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2015 06:32:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=374477" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 867 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255668</link>
      <description>A co-operative society&#039;s eligibility for deduction under section 80P turned on whether its activities and bye-laws made it a primary co-operative bank under section 80P(4); applying the Banking Regulation Act definitions, the Tribunal treated it as excluded from section 80P and rejected the mutuality plea. On deductions for bad and doubtful debts, it held that section 36(1)(viia) relief is available only within the statutory limits and found no basis for further relief beyond what was already allowed. For reserve for overdue interest on borrowings, the Tribunal found no error in the lower authority&#039;s restricted treatment and denied any additional deduction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255668</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>