<?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>2018 (2) TMI 1753 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274053</link>
    <description>Interest on fixed deposits with a bank was treated as not deductible under section 80P(2)(d) under binding jurisdictional precedent, but related expenditure had to be considered so the Assessing Officer could first compute the net interest income and exclude only that net amount from the deduction claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2018 08:50:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=528237" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1753 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274053</link>
      <description>Interest on fixed deposits with a bank was treated as not deductible under section 80P(2)(d) under binding jurisdictional precedent, but related expenditure had to be considered so the Assessing Officer could first compute the net interest income and exclude only that net amount from the deduction claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274053</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>