<?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 (3) TMI 867 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325683</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that once the CBDT approved the industrial park, the benefit of Section 80IA(4)(iii) could not be denied. However, as the income was classified as &#039;Income from House Property,&#039; the deduction under Section 80IA(4)(iii) was deemed inapplicable. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, with a suggestion for further inquiry if the claims were to be reconsidered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2016 09:47:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=421357" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 867 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325683</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that once the CBDT approved the industrial park, the benefit of Section 80IA(4)(iii) could not be denied. However, as the income was classified as &#039;Income from House Property,&#039; the deduction under Section 80IA(4)(iii) was deemed inapplicable. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, with a suggestion for further inquiry if the claims were to be reconsidered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325683</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>