<?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>2015 (1) TMI 962 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255763</link>
    <description>Residential status as &quot;resident but not ordinarily resident&quot; limited taxable income to amounts accruing or arising in India, so the Tribunal remitted the stock option transfer proceeds issue to the AO for verification of the claimed apportionment between US and Indian services and exclusion of any substantiated foreign-service portion. The additional amounts linked to the final SOTP instalment and the alleged unexplained income were also sent back for fresh adjudication after considering the assessee&#039;s evidence and granting an opportunity of hearing. Interest under sections 234A and 234B was treated as consequential, requiring no separate adjudication at that stage.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 May 2015 10:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=374637" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 962 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255763</link>
      <description>Residential status as &quot;resident but not ordinarily resident&quot; limited taxable income to amounts accruing or arising in India, so the Tribunal remitted the stock option transfer proceeds issue to the AO for verification of the claimed apportionment between US and Indian services and exclusion of any substantiated foreign-service portion. The additional amounts linked to the final SOTP instalment and the alleged unexplained income were also sent back for fresh adjudication after considering the assessee&#039;s evidence and granting an opportunity of hearing. Interest under sections 234A and 234B was treated as consequential, requiring no separate adjudication at that stage.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255763</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>