<?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>Tax Deduction Denied: ITAT Rules Form 56F Invalid When Not Certified by Qualified Chartered Accountant u/s 10A.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85137</link>
    <description>ITAT upheld AO&#039;s denial of deduction u/s 10A due to defective Form 56F filing. The form, signed by &quot;Deloitte Haskins and Sells,&quot; failed to meet statutory requirements as it lacked proper certification by an &quot;Accountant&quot; as defined u/s 288(2). The tribunal emphasized that certification must be provided by a Chartered Accountant qualifying u/s 2(1)(b) of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. The assessee&#039;s inability to demonstrate that the signing entity met the definition of an &quot;Accountant&quot; u/s 10A(5) rendered the form defective. CIT(A)&#039;s favorable ruling was reversed, and deduction claim was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2025 08:44:40 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2025 08:44:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=791558" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tax Deduction Denied: ITAT Rules Form 56F Invalid When Not Certified by Qualified Chartered Accountant u/s 10A.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85137</link>
      <description>ITAT upheld AO&#039;s denial of deduction u/s 10A due to defective Form 56F filing. The form, signed by &quot;Deloitte Haskins and Sells,&quot; failed to meet statutory requirements as it lacked proper certification by an &quot;Accountant&quot; as defined u/s 288(2). The tribunal emphasized that certification must be provided by a Chartered Accountant qualifying u/s 2(1)(b) of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. The assessee&#039;s inability to demonstrate that the signing entity met the definition of an &quot;Accountant&quot; u/s 10A(5) rendered the form defective. CIT(A)&#039;s favorable ruling was reversed, and deduction claim was rejected.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2025 08:44:40 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85137</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>