<?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 (10) TMI 280 - ITAT SURAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428722</link>
    <description>Interest earned by a co-operative credit society on savings bank accounts and fixed deposits with a nationalised bank was treated as eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i). The Tribunal applied the broader expression &quot;attributable to&quot; rather than &quot;derived from&quot; and held that interest from temporary deployment of surplus operational funds remained connected with the business of providing credit facilities to members. It also noted that the society&#039;s objects were confined to member credit activity and its bye-laws permitted investment of surplus funds. Co-ordinate bench and jurisdictionally persuasive precedents distinguishing unrelated funds or distinct businesses were followed, and the deduction was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Oct 2022 13:10:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=692808" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 280 - ITAT SURAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428722</link>
      <description>Interest earned by a co-operative credit society on savings bank accounts and fixed deposits with a nationalised bank was treated as eligible for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i). The Tribunal applied the broader expression &quot;attributable to&quot; rather than &quot;derived from&quot; and held that interest from temporary deployment of surplus operational funds remained connected with the business of providing credit facilities to members. It also noted that the society&#039;s objects were confined to member credit activity and its bye-laws permitted investment of surplus funds. Co-ordinate bench and jurisdictionally persuasive precedents distinguishing unrelated funds or distinct businesses were followed, and the deduction was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428722</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>