<?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>2026 (4) TMI 272 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789203</link>
    <description>Interest earned from deposits placed in a co-operative bank was held not deductible under Section 80P(2)(d) because Section 80P(4) bars such relief once the recipient is a co-operative bank carrying on banking business. The Court followed its earlier view and rejected the deduction claim on that issue. On the question whether interest income from investments was attributable to the appellant&#039;s business for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i), the Tribunal&#039;s remand to the Assessing Officer was found to disclose no perversity or fundamental error, and interference was refused. Both substantial questions were answered against the appellant and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2026 08:53:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=894956" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 272 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789203</link>
      <description>Interest earned from deposits placed in a co-operative bank was held not deductible under Section 80P(2)(d) because Section 80P(4) bars such relief once the recipient is a co-operative bank carrying on banking business. The Court followed its earlier view and rejected the deduction claim on that issue. On the question whether interest income from investments was attributable to the appellant&#039;s business for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i), the Tribunal&#039;s remand to the Assessing Officer was found to disclose no perversity or fundamental error, and interference was refused. Both substantial questions were answered against the appellant and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789203</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>