<?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>2024 (1) TMI 693 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448294</link>
    <description>ITAT Chandigarh set aside PCIT&#039;s revision order u/s 263 and upheld AO&#039;s decision allowing deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) to cooperative society. The assessee received interest income from deposits with Yamuna Nagar Central Co-op Bank Ltd. AO correctly allowed deduction for interest from cooperative bank while disallowing similar claims from scheduled commercial banks (HDFC, ICICI, AXIS). ITAT held AO properly examined facts and followed jurisdictional HC precedent. Since interest was earned from another cooperative society as required under section 80P(2)(d), AO&#039;s order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to revenue. PCIT lacked justifiable basis for invoking section 263 powers.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2026 11:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=740175" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 693 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448294</link>
      <description>ITAT Chandigarh set aside PCIT&#039;s revision order u/s 263 and upheld AO&#039;s decision allowing deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) to cooperative society. The assessee received interest income from deposits with Yamuna Nagar Central Co-op Bank Ltd. AO correctly allowed deduction for interest from cooperative bank while disallowing similar claims from scheduled commercial banks (HDFC, ICICI, AXIS). ITAT held AO properly examined facts and followed jurisdictional HC precedent. Since interest was earned from another cooperative society as required under section 80P(2)(d), AO&#039;s order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to revenue. PCIT lacked justifiable basis for invoking section 263 powers.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448294</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>