<?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 (6) TMI 180 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328471</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee-firm, affirming the proportionate deduction under Section 80IB(10) for eligible flats in the &#039;Neptune&#039; project. It dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, emphasizing compliance with built-up area limits and the newly introduced clauses (e) and (f) from 01.04.2010 onwards. The decision highlighted the importance of meeting eligibility criteria for deductions while permitting proportionate deductions for compliant units, setting a precedent for future assessments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Jun 2016 14:29:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=430605" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 180 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328471</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee-firm, affirming the proportionate deduction under Section 80IB(10) for eligible flats in the &#039;Neptune&#039; project. It dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, emphasizing compliance with built-up area limits and the newly introduced clauses (e) and (f) from 01.04.2010 onwards. The decision highlighted the importance of meeting eligibility criteria for deductions while permitting proportionate deductions for compliant units, setting a precedent for future assessments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328471</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>