<?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 (7) TMI 1312 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278720</link>
    <description>Section 80IC was interpreted as a time-bound deduction regime with a statutory ceiling of ten assessment years. The Tribunal held that the non obstante clause in sub-section (6) applies generally to undertakings covered by section 80IC, and that the aggregate deduction period, including any deduction earlier claimed under section 80IB or section 10C, cannot exceed that limit. It rejected an interpretation that would allow repeated fresh periods of full deduction after successive substantial expansions, as that would render section 80IC(6) and other parts of the provision redundant. The assessee was therefore treated as having exhausted the permissible deduction period, and the disallowance was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2019 07:25:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=558693" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (7) TMI 1312 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278720</link>
      <description>Section 80IC was interpreted as a time-bound deduction regime with a statutory ceiling of ten assessment years. The Tribunal held that the non obstante clause in sub-section (6) applies generally to undertakings covered by section 80IC, and that the aggregate deduction period, including any deduction earlier claimed under section 80IB or section 10C, cannot exceed that limit. It rejected an interpretation that would allow repeated fresh periods of full deduction after successive substantial expansions, as that would render section 80IC(6) and other parts of the provision redundant. The assessee was therefore treated as having exhausted the permissible deduction period, and the disallowance was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278720</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>