<?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>2008 (9) TMI 112 - HIGH COURT RAJASTHAN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32074</link>
    <description>Interest earned by a co-operative bank on loans advanced to employees against provident fund deposits and for house-building was held not to qualify for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i). The provision applies only to profits and gains attributable to the business of banking or providing credit facilities to members, and the Court read it with the Banking Regulation Act to hold that banking activity is directed to the public at large. These employee advances were made in the assessee&#039;s capacity as employer, not as part of its banking business, and lacked the necessary nexus with banking operations. Deduction was therefore denied and the issue was decided against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 11:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70716" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 112 - HIGH COURT RAJASTHAN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32074</link>
      <description>Interest earned by a co-operative bank on loans advanced to employees against provident fund deposits and for house-building was held not to qualify for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i). The provision applies only to profits and gains attributable to the business of banking or providing credit facilities to members, and the Court read it with the Banking Regulation Act to hold that banking activity is directed to the public at large. These employee advances were made in the assessee&#039;s capacity as employer, not as part of its banking business, and lacked the necessary nexus with banking operations. Deduction was therefore denied and the issue was decided against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32074</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>