<?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 (7) TMI 905 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330307</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10, overturning the disallowances made by the AO under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The Tribunal held that the AO had not recorded the necessary satisfaction as mandated under Section 14A(2) before applying Rule 8D. As a result, the disallowances were deemed unjustified, leading to a favorable outcome for the assessee in both cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:06:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=435771" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 905 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330307</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10, overturning the disallowances made by the AO under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The Tribunal held that the AO had not recorded the necessary satisfaction as mandated under Section 14A(2) before applying Rule 8D. As a result, the disallowances were deemed unjustified, leading to a favorable outcome for the assessee in both cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330307</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>