<?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>2014 (2) TMI 983 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244389</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the AO to grant the deduction u/s 80IB(10) for the entire project. The Tribunal held that the commercial area restriction did not apply as the project commenced before 01-04-2005 and was completed before the statutory deadline, despite the delay in obtaining the completion certificate. The issue of proportionate deduction for residential units completed before 31-03-2008 was not separately addressed as the full deduction was allowed based on the resolution of the primary issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=347049" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (2) TMI 983 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244389</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the AO to grant the deduction u/s 80IB(10) for the entire project. The Tribunal held that the commercial area restriction did not apply as the project commenced before 01-04-2005 and was completed before the statutory deadline, despite the delay in obtaining the completion certificate. The issue of proportionate deduction for residential units completed before 31-03-2008 was not separately addressed as the full deduction was allowed based on the resolution of the primary issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244389</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>