<?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 343 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327362</link>
    <description>The appeal by the Assessing Officer regarding the deletion of royalty payment addition was dismissed by the ITAT, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decision. The ITAT remitted the issues concerning the import of 2, 4 DTBP and the export of DPO and PTBP back to the assessment stage for detailed reasoning and proper opportunity for the assessee to present their case. The appeal by the assessee was partly allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 May 2016 11:29:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427574" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 343 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327362</link>
      <description>The appeal by the Assessing Officer regarding the deletion of royalty payment addition was dismissed by the ITAT, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decision. The ITAT remitted the issues concerning the import of 2, 4 DTBP and the export of DPO and PTBP back to the assessment stage for detailed reasoning and proper opportunity for the assessee to present their case. The appeal by the assessee was partly allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327362</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>