<?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>2017 (5) TMI 1092 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343354</link>
    <description>The Tribunal quashed the reassessment order for AY 2006-07, ruling in favor of the assessee due to lack of jurisdiction for reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation from AY 1998-99 was allowed based on a judgment of the High Court. The recalculated book profits by adding bad debt reserve were deemed incorrect, and the reassessment order for AY 2006-07 was set aside. The appeals of the Revenue for AYs 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09 were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 May 2017 07:03:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=469581" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 1092 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343354</link>
      <description>The Tribunal quashed the reassessment order for AY 2006-07, ruling in favor of the assessee due to lack of jurisdiction for reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation from AY 1998-99 was allowed based on a judgment of the High Court. The recalculated book profits by adding bad debt reserve were deemed incorrect, and the reassessment order for AY 2006-07 was set aside. The appeals of the Revenue for AYs 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09 were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343354</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>