<?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>ITAT rejects section 145A turnover definition for Finance Act 2018 tax rate computation</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89906</link>
    <description>ITAT held that turnover determination for tax rate computation under Finance Act 2018 cannot adopt the definition provided under section 145A of the Income Tax Act. The controversy regarding whether turnover should include excise duty for determining applicable tax rate of 25% or 30% was resolved by following precedent established in Kluber Lubrication India case. The tribunal set aside CIT(A)&#039;s order and directed the Assessing Officer to compute tax at 25% rate, rejecting the CPC ITD portal&#039;s computation methodology that would have resulted in higher 30% tax rate for the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2025 08:32:06 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2025 08:32:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=832328" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>ITAT rejects section 145A turnover definition for Finance Act 2018 tax rate computation</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89906</link>
      <description>ITAT held that turnover determination for tax rate computation under Finance Act 2018 cannot adopt the definition provided under section 145A of the Income Tax Act. The controversy regarding whether turnover should include excise duty for determining applicable tax rate of 25% or 30% was resolved by following precedent established in Kluber Lubrication India case. The tribunal set aside CIT(A)&#039;s order and directed the Assessing Officer to compute tax at 25% rate, rejecting the CPC ITD portal&#039;s computation methodology that would have resulted in higher 30% tax rate for the assessee.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2025 08:32:06 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89906</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>