<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2012 (3) TMI 120 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211182</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, finding that the Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s jurisdiction under Section 263 was not proper regarding the deduction under Section 80HHC on interest receipt. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s jurisdiction on the issue of exchange gain on forward contract transactions, directing the Assessing Officer to apply Clause (baa) of Explanation to Section 80HHC.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=184604" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (3) TMI 120 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211182</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, finding that the Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s jurisdiction under Section 263 was not proper regarding the deduction under Section 80HHC on interest receipt. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s jurisdiction on the issue of exchange gain on forward contract transactions, directing the Assessing Officer to apply Clause (baa) of Explanation to Section 80HHC.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211182</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>