<?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 (5) TMI 751 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259877</link>
    <description>A co-operative credit society remained eligible in principle for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) and section 80P(2)(d) because acceptance of deposits from nominal or associate members did not alter its character or by itself disqualify it; the decisive test was whether it provided credit facilities to members, and section 80P(4) did not apply because it excludes co-operative banks, not co-operative credit societies. However, the deduction had to be recomputed because income attributable to transactions with nominal or associate members had not been properly excluded. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh verification and computation of the admissible deduction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2015 15:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=385895" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 751 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259877</link>
      <description>A co-operative credit society remained eligible in principle for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) and section 80P(2)(d) because acceptance of deposits from nominal or associate members did not alter its character or by itself disqualify it; the decisive test was whether it provided credit facilities to members, and section 80P(4) did not apply because it excludes co-operative banks, not co-operative credit societies. However, the deduction had to be recomputed because income attributable to transactions with nominal or associate members had not been properly excluded. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh verification and computation of the admissible deduction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259877</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>