<?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>2011 (9) TMI 1086 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184346</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A) orders for assessment years 2004-05 and 2007-08, dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeals. It concluded that Unit II was financially separate from the old unit, eligible for a 100% deduction under section 80IB. The Tribunal emphasized the installation of new plant and machinery as a key factor, citing Supreme Court judgments. The appeal by the revenue was dismissed, affirming the deduction for Unit II.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2016 12:26:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=434014" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (9) TMI 1086 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184346</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A) orders for assessment years 2004-05 and 2007-08, dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeals. It concluded that Unit II was financially separate from the old unit, eligible for a 100% deduction under section 80IB. The Tribunal emphasized the installation of new plant and machinery as a key factor, citing Supreme Court judgments. The appeal by the revenue was dismissed, affirming the deduction for Unit II.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184346</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>