<?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 (11) TMI 401 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267592</link>
    <description>The Tribunal considered whether deduction under section 80IA(4) was available in relation to Bangalore International Airport Ltd.&#039;s status as a statutory body. It followed the jurisdictional High Court&#039;s binding view that the entity, on the basis of its constitution, shareholding, agreements and functions, performs statutory and public functions and is amenable to writ jurisdiction. As the High Court had already decided the same core issue against the Revenue&#039;s position, the Tribunal declined to take a contrary view and upheld the first appellate authority&#039;s order. The deduction was therefore allowed and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2015 16:30:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=404767" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 401 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267592</link>
      <description>The Tribunal considered whether deduction under section 80IA(4) was available in relation to Bangalore International Airport Ltd.&#039;s status as a statutory body. It followed the jurisdictional High Court&#039;s binding view that the entity, on the basis of its constitution, shareholding, agreements and functions, performs statutory and public functions and is amenable to writ jurisdiction. As the High Court had already decided the same core issue against the Revenue&#039;s position, the Tribunal declined to take a contrary view and upheld the first appellate authority&#039;s order. The deduction was therefore allowed and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267592</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>