<?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>2021 (10) TMI 793 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413741</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on both issues. It held that the proviso to section 2(15) of the I.T. Act did not apply to the assessee, allowing it to claim exemption under section 11. Additionally, the Tribunal directed that depreciation should be allowed on the assets, even if their cost had been treated as an application of income. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee was partly allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2021 11:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=658883" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 793 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413741</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on both issues. It held that the proviso to section 2(15) of the I.T. Act did not apply to the assessee, allowing it to claim exemption under section 11. Additionally, the Tribunal directed that depreciation should be allowed on the assets, even if their cost had been treated as an application of income. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee was partly allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413741</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>