<?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 (12) TMI 967 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402168</link>
    <description>The tribunal partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decision on the disallowance of the provision for retention bonus. The tribunal directed the A.O. to restrict the disallowance to the amount not paid before the due date. However, the issue of addition of interest income was remanded back to the A.O. for further examination due to the lack of factual verification by the CIT(A).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Dec 2020 16:20:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=631233" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 967 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402168</link>
      <description>The tribunal partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decision on the disallowance of the provision for retention bonus. The tribunal directed the A.O. to restrict the disallowance to the amount not paid before the due date. However, the issue of addition of interest income was remanded back to the A.O. for further examination due to the lack of factual verification by the CIT(A).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402168</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>