<?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>2018 (9) TMI 284 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366548</link>
    <description>Interest earned by a primary agricultural credit society on temporary investments of surplus funds with sub-treasuries and banks was treated as attributable to its credit business, because the society was engaged in providing credit facilities to members and was not shown to be a cooperative bank with an RBI licence. The Tribunal followed authority holding that such income, when generated from funds parked in the course of banking or credit operations, forms part of business income and qualifies for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i). It distinguished contrary Supreme Court authority on its different factual setting involving retained sale proceeds, and accepted that the interest was not taxable as income from other sources.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Sep 2018 09:17:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=533366" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 284 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366548</link>
      <description>Interest earned by a primary agricultural credit society on temporary investments of surplus funds with sub-treasuries and banks was treated as attributable to its credit business, because the society was engaged in providing credit facilities to members and was not shown to be a cooperative bank with an RBI licence. The Tribunal followed authority holding that such income, when generated from funds parked in the course of banking or credit operations, forms part of business income and qualifies for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i). It distinguished contrary Supreme Court authority on its different factual setting involving retained sale proceeds, and accepted that the interest was not taxable as income from other sources.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366548</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>