<?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>2020 (2) TMI 933 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392489</link>
    <description>The ITAT Bangalore dismissed cross appeals by both the assessee and the Revenue for the Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The Tribunal found that the TP grounds were irrelevant due to the conclusion of the MAP. Regarding the corporate tax issue for 2011-12, the Tribunal upheld the AO&#039;s order, aligning with the Karnataka HC precedent, which clarified that reducing export turnover also reduces total turnover. The appeals were dismissed based on these considerations, with the judgment pronounced on 07-02-2020.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Nov 2024 11:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604699" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 933 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392489</link>
      <description>The ITAT Bangalore dismissed cross appeals by both the assessee and the Revenue for the Assessment Years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The Tribunal found that the TP grounds were irrelevant due to the conclusion of the MAP. Regarding the corporate tax issue for 2011-12, the Tribunal upheld the AO&#039;s order, aligning with the Karnataka HC precedent, which clarified that reducing export turnover also reduces total turnover. The appeals were dismissed based on these considerations, with the judgment pronounced on 07-02-2020.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392489</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>