<?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>2017 (5) TMI 1824 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456092</link>
    <description>The HC condoned the delay in re-filing the appeal in ITA No. 178/2017. The Revenue&#039;s appeal challenging the addition based on the percentage completion method was dismissed, as it was previously resolved in favor of the Assessee. The Court set the deduction under Section 80IB(10) and the calculation of built-up area issues for final hearing, requiring both parties to submit arguments and case laws.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Jun 2024 08:51:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=757664" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 1824 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456092</link>
      <description>The HC condoned the delay in re-filing the appeal in ITA No. 178/2017. The Revenue&#039;s appeal challenging the addition based on the percentage completion method was dismissed, as it was previously resolved in favor of the Assessee. The Court set the deduction under Section 80IB(10) and the calculation of built-up area issues for final hearing, requiring both parties to submit arguments and case laws.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456092</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>