<?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>1997 (10) TMI 396 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182570</link>
    <description>The case involved disputes over the computation of book profit under section 115J for the assessment year 1989-90. The Revenue challenged the decision, seeking rectification under section 154 of the IT Act. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, ruling that the issues were debatable and not subject to rectification. The crux was whether carried forward loss should reduce profit without carried forward depreciation under section 115J. The Tribunal found the matter debatable, emphasizing the restrictions on dividend declarations under section 205 of the Companies Act. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 May 2016 14:20:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=428125" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (10) TMI 396 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182570</link>
      <description>The case involved disputes over the computation of book profit under section 115J for the assessment year 1989-90. The Revenue challenged the decision, seeking rectification under section 154 of the IT Act. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, ruling that the issues were debatable and not subject to rectification. The crux was whether carried forward loss should reduce profit without carried forward depreciation under section 115J. The Tribunal found the matter debatable, emphasizing the restrictions on dividend declarations under section 205 of the Companies Act. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182570</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>