<?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 (9) TMI 398 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332137</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s order, directing the AO to include various incomes in the profits of the business for computing the deduction under section 10B, except for the reversion of excess provisions. The AO was directed to verify if the original provision was allowed as a deduction in earlier assessment years and decide accordingly. The appeal by the Revenue was partly allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 11 Sep 2016 14:39:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=440720" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 398 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332137</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s order, directing the AO to include various incomes in the profits of the business for computing the deduction under section 10B, except for the reversion of excess provisions. The AO was directed to verify if the original provision was allowed as a deduction in earlier assessment years and decide accordingly. The appeal by the Revenue was partly allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332137</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>