<?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>2013 (2) TMI 68 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220658</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, ruling that the disallowed expenditure under section 40(a)(ia) formed part of the firm&#039;s gross total income and was eligible for deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the disallowed amount to be derived from the eligible business to support the claim for deduction, ultimately dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal and affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s reasoned decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2013 16:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=194020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (2) TMI 68 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220658</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, ruling that the disallowed expenditure under section 40(a)(ia) formed part of the firm&#039;s gross total income and was eligible for deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the disallowed amount to be derived from the eligible business to support the claim for deduction, ultimately dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal and affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s reasoned decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220658</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>