<?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>2016 (4) TMI 1406 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295145</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remitting the matter back to the AO to verify the eligible deduction amount under Section 35(1)(iv). It upheld the treatment of grants as capital receipts and related expenditure as capital expenditure. Additionally, the disallowance under Section 14A was upheld, with the Tribunal agreeing with the AO&#039;s application of Rule 8D(2)(iii) due to significant dividend income and changes in investments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 May 2021 08:28:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=644780" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 1406 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295145</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remitting the matter back to the AO to verify the eligible deduction amount under Section 35(1)(iv). It upheld the treatment of grants as capital receipts and related expenditure as capital expenditure. Additionally, the disallowance under Section 14A was upheld, with the Tribunal agreeing with the AO&#039;s application of Rule 8D(2)(iii) due to significant dividend income and changes in investments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295145</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>