<?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>2008 (11) TMI 278 - ITAT BOMBAY-H</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59570</link>
    <description>All the appeals of the assessee were dismissed by the Tribunal. The issues regarding reopening under Section 148, provision for warranty, and depreciation on technical know-how were not pressed by the assessee and thus dismissed. The claim for proportionate leasehold premium was dismissed based on precedent. The Tribunal rejected the treatment of retention money, affirming the AO&#039;s decision, and denied the deduction under Section 80-IA on trading turnover, as trading profits were not derived from the industrial undertaking.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2023 19:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=98019" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (11) TMI 278 - ITAT BOMBAY-H</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59570</link>
      <description>All the appeals of the assessee were dismissed by the Tribunal. The issues regarding reopening under Section 148, provision for warranty, and depreciation on technical know-how were not pressed by the assessee and thus dismissed. The claim for proportionate leasehold premium was dismissed based on precedent. The Tribunal rejected the treatment of retention money, affirming the AO&#039;s decision, and denied the deduction under Section 80-IA on trading turnover, as trading profits were not derived from the industrial undertaking.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59570</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>