Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.27 seconds)

Income-Tax Officer,, vs Swa Ashokrao Bankar Nagari Sahakari ... on 4 May, 2017

9. On the perusal of record, we find that the issue in the present appeal is against the claim of deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on interest income received from fixed deposits with Bank of India, HDFC Bank, State Bank of India, ICICI Bank and Bank of Baroda. The said issue is squarely covered by the order of the Tribunal in ITO Vs. Niphad Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd. (supra) wherein the Tribunal had held that the assessee is entitled to claim deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on the interest income received by it on bank fixed deposits. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced at page 9 of the appellate order but are not being reproduced for the sake of brevity.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune Cites 4 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

M/S The Totgars Co-Operative Sale ... vs The Income Tax Officer on 30 September, 2008

We find the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka after considering the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgar's Cooperative Sale Society Ltd. (Supra) held that the interest earned by such cooperative societies on short term deposits with scheduled banks is eligible for deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i). The relevant observation of the Hon'ble High Court from para 6 onwards read as under :
Karnataka High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 496 - Full Document

Mantola Co-Operative Thrift And Credit ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax 21 on 17 July, 2017

11. No doubt, a contrary decision to this effect was also cited by the Ld. Departmental Representative where the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mantola Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd. (Supra) has held that where the assessee cooperative society was engaged in providing credit facilities to its members earns interest income on surplus funds deposited as fixed deposits, such interest income would be assessable as "income from other sources" and thus not eligible for deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i). However, it is also the settled proposition of law that when two views are possible, the view which is in favour of the assessee has to be followed.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 118 - S K Kaul - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax Andhra ... vs Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport ... on 7 March, 1986

In fact similar view is taken by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State co- operative Bank Ltd., [2011] 200 Taxman 220/12 taxmann.com 66. In that view of the matter, the order passed by the appellate authorities denying the benefit of deduction of the aforesaid amount is unsustainable in law. Accordingly it is hereby set aside. The substantial question of law is answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Hence, we pass the following order:"
Supreme Court of India Cites 37 - Cited by 171 - D P Madon - Full Document

Commr. Of Income Tax. vs M/S Balaji Vegetable Products (P) Ltd. on 16 October, 2015

Since in the instant case, two divergent decisions were cited before us and no decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court is available, therefore, following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vegetable products reported in 88 ITR 192 we hold that the view in favour of the assessee, i.e. the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has to be followed. Accordingly, we hold that the interest income earned by the assessee on short term deposits kept with banks has to be allowed as deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the I.T. Act. The order of the CIT(A) is accordingly set aside and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed."
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 1 - Cited by 64 - Full Document
1