<?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>2026 (5) TMI 1715 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792512</link>
    <description>Rebate under section 87A is linked to total income and, in the absence of an express statutory exclusion, can apply to tax on short-term capital gains taxed under section 111A where the assessee&#039;s total income stays within the prescribed limit under the new tax regime. The text notes that total income includes income under all heads, including capital gains, and that the Legislature used explicit exclusionary language in section 112A(6) when it intended to deny rebate. It treats the Finance Act, 2025 amendment as prospective and confirmatory of the earlier position. Processing of the return was therefore said to have wrongly denied the rebate and the consequential demand was to be deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 May 2026 08:59:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=904348" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 1715 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792512</link>
      <description>Rebate under section 87A is linked to total income and, in the absence of an express statutory exclusion, can apply to tax on short-term capital gains taxed under section 111A where the assessee&#039;s total income stays within the prescribed limit under the new tax regime. The text notes that total income includes income under all heads, including capital gains, and that the Legislature used explicit exclusionary language in section 112A(6) when it intended to deny rebate. It treats the Finance Act, 2025 amendment as prospective and confirmatory of the earlier position. Processing of the return was therefore said to have wrongly denied the rebate and the consequential demand was to be deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792512</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>