<?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>2022 (9) TMI 577 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427632</link>
    <description>Section 36(1)(viia) was examined for whether an eligible co-operative bank could claim deduction for provision for bad and doubtful debts under the second limb based on aggregate average advances of rural branches. The Finance Act, 2007 amendment extending the benefit to co-operative banks, the statutory Explanation on rural branches, and the Notes on Clauses and Memorandum were considered, but the calculation of rural advances and the applicability of the second limb were found to need fresh factual verification. The disallowance was therefore not finally decided on merits and the matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2022 09:22:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=690643" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 577 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427632</link>
      <description>Section 36(1)(viia) was examined for whether an eligible co-operative bank could claim deduction for provision for bad and doubtful debts under the second limb based on aggregate average advances of rural branches. The Finance Act, 2007 amendment extending the benefit to co-operative banks, the statutory Explanation on rural branches, and the Notes on Clauses and Memorandum were considered, but the calculation of rural advances and the applicability of the second limb were found to need fresh factual verification. The disallowance was therefore not finally decided on merits and the matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427632</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>