Commissioner of Income Tax v. Madurai District Central Co-operative Bank Limited
1996-03-12
K.A.THANIKKACHALAM, N.V.BALASUBRAMANIAN
body1996
DigiLaw.ai
Judgment :- THANIKKACHALAM, J. At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that : (i) interest on securities, (ii) subsidies received from the Government, and (iii) dividends received by the assessee, were business income of the assessee entitled to deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?" The point for consideration is whether interest on securities, subsidies received from the Government and dividends received by the assessee were business income entitled to deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. So far as deduction claimed under items Nos. (i) and (ii) are concerned, namely, interest on securities and subsidies received, the deduction of the same came up for consideration before this court in the case of the same assessee for the assessment years 1970-71 to 1973-74, wherein this court in CIT v. Madurai District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. 1984 (148) ITR 196, 1984 (42) CTR 27, 1984 (17) TAXMAN 247 , 1986 (2) TLR 433, 1984 (42) CTR(Mad) 27 held that the assessee is entitled to deduction of interest on securities and subsidies received from the Government under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In so far as item No. (iii), namely, the dividend received by the assessee is concerned, it came up for consideration before this court in T. C. Nos. 1153 and 1154 of 1982 in the case of CIT v. Ramanathapuram District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. 1997 (224) ITR 226, 1997 (142) CTR 80, wherein by a judgment dated January 10, 1996, this court held that the assessee is entitled to deduction with regard to dividend received by the assessee under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. In view of the decisions cited supra, we answer the question referred to us in respect of all the three items in the affirmative and against the Department. No costs.