<?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>2025 (4) TMI 1263 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769349</link>
    <description>The ITAT resolved a tax dispute involving section 80IC deduction. The Tribunal upheld the assessee&#039;s entitlement to 100% deduction under section 80IC for AY 2016-17, based on the Supreme Court&#039;s Aarham Softronics ruling. It rejected the rectification application under section 154, finding it an attempt to introduce new facts beyond the scope of procedural correction. The appeal was partially allowed, affirming the substantial expansion claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2025 09:13:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=816796" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 1263 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769349</link>
      <description>The ITAT resolved a tax dispute involving section 80IC deduction. The Tribunal upheld the assessee&#039;s entitlement to 100% deduction under section 80IC for AY 2016-17, based on the Supreme Court&#039;s Aarham Softronics ruling. It rejected the rectification application under section 154, finding it an attempt to introduce new facts beyond the scope of procedural correction. The appeal was partially allowed, affirming the substantial expansion claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769349</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>