<?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 (8) TMI 484 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346426</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decision on the admission of additional evidences and the computation of peak credit for the impugned assessment year. The Tribunal confirmed the allowance of peak credit for the earlier year, which the AO had not considered initially, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Aug 2017 08:29:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=485382" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 484 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346426</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decision on the admission of additional evidences and the computation of peak credit for the impugned assessment year. The Tribunal confirmed the allowance of peak credit for the earlier year, which the AO had not considered initially, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346426</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>