<?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 (8) TMI 749 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397806</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, upholding the re-opening of assessment beyond four years due to failure to disclose material facts. It affirmed the ineligibility of flat cancellation receipts for deduction under section 80IB. The Tribunal referred back the eligibility of interest income and bank charges recovered for deduction under section 80IB to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration with verification of facts and evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2020 18:38:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=620948" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (8) TMI 749 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397806</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, upholding the re-opening of assessment beyond four years due to failure to disclose material facts. It affirmed the ineligibility of flat cancellation receipts for deduction under section 80IB. The Tribunal referred back the eligibility of interest income and bank charges recovered for deduction under section 80IB to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration with verification of facts and evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397806</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>