<?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 (9) TMI 64 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216240</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)&#039;s direction to apply section 10B(6) for computing income under section 115JB, emphasizing that brought forward depreciation should not be included in current year depreciation. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Revenue on the normal provisions of the Act but sided with the CIT(A) on the application of section 10B(6), partially allowing the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=189623" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 64 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216240</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)&#039;s direction to apply section 10B(6) for computing income under section 115JB, emphasizing that brought forward depreciation should not be included in current year depreciation. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Revenue on the normal provisions of the Act but sided with the CIT(A) on the application of section 10B(6), partially allowing the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216240</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>