<?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 (12) TMI 193 - ITAT RAJKOT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219178</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(A), determining that the proviso to Section 10A(1A) of the Income Tax Act is mandatory. Consequently, the failure to file the return within the specified due date under Section 139(1) led to the denial of the deduction under Section 10A. The appeal by the assessee was dismissed, favoring the revenue, with no further issues involved, and the case was not remanded to the Division Bench.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2016 11:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192548" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 193 - ITAT RAJKOT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219178</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(A), determining that the proviso to Section 10A(1A) of the Income Tax Act is mandatory. Consequently, the failure to file the return within the specified due date under Section 139(1) led to the denial of the deduction under Section 10A. The appeal by the assessee was dismissed, favoring the revenue, with no further issues involved, and the case was not remanded to the Division Bench.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219178</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>