https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385721 The Tribunal allowed both appeals of the assessee. For the assessment year 2013-2014, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee, a ricemill operator, was entitled to the deduction under Section 80IB(11A), referencing a Madras HC judgment. For the assessment year 2014-2015, the Tribunal quashed the Principal CIT's order under Section 263, finding it lacked a valid basis and thorough examination. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the AO to allow the deduction and set aside the Principal CIT's revision, resulting in a favorable outcome for the assessee in both matters. en-us Fri, 24 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Nov 2024 15:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385721 The Tribunal allowed both appeals of the assessee. For the assessment year 2013-2014, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee, a ricemill operator, was entitled to the deduction under Section 80IB(11A), referencing a Madras HC judgment. For the assessment year 2014-2015, the Tribunal quashed the Principal CIT's order under Section 263, finding it lacked a valid basis and thorough examination. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the AO to allow the deduction and set aside the Principal CIT's revision, resulting in a favorable outcome for the assessee in both matters. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 24 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385721