S.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the interest on securities, subsidies received from the Government and dividend business income of the assessee entitled to deduction under s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the IT Act, 1961?

Supreme Court Of India

CIT vs. Ramanathapuram Distt. Co-Op. Central Bank Ltd.

Sections 80P(2)(a)(i)

Asst. Year 1977-78, 1978-79, 1979-80

S.P. Bharucha, Y.K. Sabharwal & Brijesh Kumar, JJ.

Civil Appeal Nos. 4477 to 4479 of 1998

30th October, 2001

Counsel Appeared

R.P. Bhatt with Preetesh Kapur, B.V. Balram Das & Ms. Sushma Suri, for the Appellant : R. Venkataraman with V. Prabhakar & Ms. Revathy Raghavan, for the Respondent

ORDER

BY THE COURT :

The High Court has answered against the Revenue, the following question:

“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the interest on securities, subsidies received from the Government and dividend business income of the assessee entitled to deduction under s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the IT Act, 1961?”

The very question was considered by this Court in CIT vs. Karnataka State Co-operative Apex Bank Ltd. (2001) 169 CTR (SC) 486 : (2001) 251 ITR 194 (SC) and the conclusion was reiterated in Mehsana District Central Co- operative Bank Ltd. vs. ITO (2001) 170 CTR (SC) 169 : (2001) 251 ITR 522 (SC).

It is now contended on behalf of the Revenue that the deduction of this Court in United Commercial Bank Ltd. vs. CIT (1957) 32 ITR 688 (SC) : TC 13R.1016 was not considered.

We do not think that it is open to the Revenue to urge, through different counsel, the same thing again and again. We are satisfied that the answer to the question has been correctly given in the decisions aforementioned and in the order under appeal.

The civil appeals are dismissed with costs.

 

[Citation : 255 ITR 423]

Malcare WordPress Security