<?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 594 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219579</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the Assessee&#039;s claim for deduction under Section 80-O, as the Assessee failed to demonstrate that the payments were for the use of patents or designs. However, the Tribunal allowed the appeal on the levy of interest under Section 220(2) for statistical purposes, directing the Assessing Officer to re-examine the computation of interest and the issuance of notice under Section 156.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2012 10:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192949" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 594 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219579</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the Assessee&#039;s claim for deduction under Section 80-O, as the Assessee failed to demonstrate that the payments were for the use of patents or designs. However, the Tribunal allowed the appeal on the levy of interest under Section 220(2) for statistical purposes, directing the Assessing Officer to re-examine the computation of interest and the issuance of notice under Section 156.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219579</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>