<?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 419 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328710</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals for statistical purposes. The issues concerning the non-compete fee and the film software library were remanded back to the Assessing Officer for further examination. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to treat the cost of production of TV programs as revenue expenditure, in line with previous judgments. The order was pronounced on 24.03.2016.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2016 12:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=431240" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 419 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328710</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals for statistical purposes. The issues concerning the non-compete fee and the film software library were remanded back to the Assessing Officer for further examination. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to treat the cost of production of TV programs as revenue expenditure, in line with previous judgments. The order was pronounced on 24.03.2016.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328710</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>