The Tribunal held that interest earned on surplus funds is business income of a credit society. Such income qualifies for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i).
The Tribunal held that adding both cash deposits and withdrawals may result in double taxation. The case was remanded for fresh examination with proper opportunity.
The Tribunal held that loss from discontinued operations cannot be restricted without evidence. Fully supported expenses must be allowed under Section 37(1).
Detailed explanation of meaning of income under section 2(24), including receipts, gains, benefits, subsidies, and other taxable items.
Residential status under the Income-tax Act determines taxability based on stay, control, or management. The key takeaway is that classification as ROR, RNOR, or NR directly impacts the scope of income taxable in India.
The Tribunal held that eligibility for Section 80P depends on actual activities, not the society’s name. Deduction was allowed as the society provided credit facilities to members.
The issue involved whether credit could be availed when duties were paid via DEPB instead of cash. The Tribunal held that such payment qualifies for CENVAT credit. The takeaway is that mode of payment does not restrict credit eligibility.
The issue involved penalty on individuals claiming ignorance of smuggled gold. The Tribunal rejected the defence due to lack of evidence and inconsistencies. The takeaway is that unsupported claims cannot negate liability.
The issue involved taxability of subsidies received from BCCI. The Tribunal held that such payments are grants-in-aid and not consideration for services. The takeaway is that grants for promotion of sports are not taxable.
The issue involved whether a guarantee cap covered both principal and interest. The Tribunal held that default interest is a separate liability. The takeaway is that interest obligations can extend beyond capped principal liability.
