<?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>2003 (1) TMI 252 - ITAT CHANDIGARH-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61688</link>
    <description>The appeal was partly allowed in the case. The disallowance of interest paid on account of interest-free advances was deleted as the tribunal found no nexus between the advances and interest-bearing loans. The disallowance of consultation fees under Section 40A(12) was set aside, providing relief to the assessee. However, the disallowance of Rs. 10,000 out of telephone expenses was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2011 18:40:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=100134" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (1) TMI 252 - ITAT CHANDIGARH-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61688</link>
      <description>The appeal was partly allowed in the case. The disallowance of interest paid on account of interest-free advances was deleted as the tribunal found no nexus between the advances and interest-bearing loans. The disallowance of consultation fees under Section 40A(12) was set aside, providing relief to the assessee. However, the disallowance of Rs. 10,000 out of telephone expenses was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61688</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>