9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 1158X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oached the Tribunal - HELD THAT:- Pune Benches of the Tribunal in Sureshdada Jain Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit [ 2019 (4) TMI 682 - ITAT PUNE] decided the question of availability of deduction u/s 80P on interest income by noticing that the Pune ITAT in an earlier case of Shri Laxmi Narayan Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit [ 2015 (8) TMI 1085 - ITAT PUNE] had allowed the deduction in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2)(d) of the Act. When we consider the effect of this decision, it turns out that the same is not germane to case under consideration in view of the position that the primary claim of the extant assessee is directly about the eligibility of deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. In view of the foregoing discussion, we uphold the conclusion drawn by the ld CIT(A) in the impugned order by allowing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(d) in respect of interest earned on deposits made with banks. The AO refused deduction u/s.80P on such interest income, which came to be allowed in the first appeal. Aggrieved thereby, the Revenue has approached the Tribunal. 3. We have heard the rival submissions in Virtual Court and gone through the relevant material on record. The Pune Benches of the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... banks. Both the Hon ble High Courts took into consideration the ratio laid down in the case of Totgar s Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. (supra) . No direct judgment from the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court on the point having been pointed out, the Tribunal in Shri Laxmi Narayan Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit ( supra ) preferred to go with the view in favour of the assessee by the Hon b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tc. It was in that background of the facts that the Hon ble High Court held that the assessee could not claim deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act. When we consider the effect of this decision, it turns out that the same is not germane to case under consideration in view of the position that the primary claim of the extant assessee is directly about the eligibility of deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
