<?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>2015 (5) TMI 1147 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199733</link>
    <description>The tribunal dismissed the departmental appeal and allowed the assessee&#039;s cross-objection, setting aside the part of the CIT(A)&#039;s order that sustained the penalty. Penalties for disallowance of interest, web/software development expenses, reallocation of expenses, and carry forward of depreciation loss were not warranted. However, the penalty for the excess deduction claimed under Section 80IC was upheld due to the discrepancy with the auditor&#039;s certification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2018 22:22:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512070" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 1147 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199733</link>
      <description>The tribunal dismissed the departmental appeal and allowed the assessee&#039;s cross-objection, setting aside the part of the CIT(A)&#039;s order that sustained the penalty. Penalties for disallowance of interest, web/software development expenses, reallocation of expenses, and carry forward of depreciation loss were not warranted. However, the penalty for the excess deduction claimed under Section 80IC was upheld due to the discrepancy with the auditor&#039;s certification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199733</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>