<?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 (5) TMI 249 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327268</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed appeals for AY 2006-07 and 2007-08 regarding deduction u/s.80IB(10). The decision was based on settled ownership issues, lack of attribution for flat size violations, and the need for a fresh assessment considering the new evidence. The Tribunal directed a re-examination of the deduction eligibility for AY 2006-07 based on the AUDA certificate, granting both parties a fair hearing. Both appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 May 2016 11:16:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427277" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 249 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327268</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed appeals for AY 2006-07 and 2007-08 regarding deduction u/s.80IB(10). The decision was based on settled ownership issues, lack of attribution for flat size violations, and the need for a fresh assessment considering the new evidence. The Tribunal directed a re-examination of the deduction eligibility for AY 2006-07 based on the AUDA certificate, granting both parties a fair hearing. Both appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327268</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>