<?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 (11) TMI 69 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334051</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to allow relief of Rs. 26,62,673/- and confirmed the remaining Section 14A disallowance of Rs. 1,27,74,382/- for the assessment year 2001-02. For the assessment year 2002-03, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the Section 14A disallowance of Rs. 1,11,83,862/-. Regarding speculation loss treatment under Section 73, the Tribunal deleted the disallowance of Rs. 1,20,741/- for 2001-02 and upheld the treatment of certain amounts as speculative loss for 2002-03. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal to revive the Section 271(1)(c) penalty, concluding that there was no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2016 18:15:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=446513" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 69 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334051</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to allow relief of Rs. 26,62,673/- and confirmed the remaining Section 14A disallowance of Rs. 1,27,74,382/- for the assessment year 2001-02. For the assessment year 2002-03, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the Section 14A disallowance of Rs. 1,11,83,862/-. Regarding speculation loss treatment under Section 73, the Tribunal deleted the disallowance of Rs. 1,20,741/- for 2001-02 and upheld the treatment of certain amounts as speculative loss for 2002-03. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal to revive the Section 271(1)(c) penalty, concluding that there was no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334051</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>