<?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>2017 (10) TMI 1683 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470242</link>
    <description>Eligibility for deduction of interest or dividend income from investments with a co-operative bank under Section 80P(2)(d) depends on the character of the income and the activity generating it. Apparent coverage under a clause of Section 80P(2) is not conclusive where factual analysis establishes that the income is ineligible. The text states that such interest or dividend income was not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d), favouring the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2026 14:55:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=912787" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 1683 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470242</link>
      <description>Eligibility for deduction of interest or dividend income from investments with a co-operative bank under Section 80P(2)(d) depends on the character of the income and the activity generating it. Apparent coverage under a clause of Section 80P(2) is not conclusive where factual analysis establishes that the income is ineligible. The text states that such interest or dividend income was not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d), favouring the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470242</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>