<?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>2016 (2) TMI 428 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271723</link>
    <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) should only cover payments not subject to TDS and can be considered as part of business profit for deduction under section 80-IB(10). The tribunal remitted the computation issue under section 80-IB(10) back to the CIT(A) for further review. The tribunal&#039;s decision favored the assessee, indicating a successful outcome in addressing the issues raised in the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2016 00:45:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=416444" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 428 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271723</link>
      <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) should only cover payments not subject to TDS and can be considered as part of business profit for deduction under section 80-IB(10). The tribunal remitted the computation issue under section 80-IB(10) back to the CIT(A) for further review. The tribunal&#039;s decision favored the assessee, indicating a successful outcome in addressing the issues raised in the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271723</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>