<?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>2005 (12) TMI 220 - ITAT DELHI-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63812</link>
    <description>The ITAT partially allowed the appeal, permitting the deduction of trip expenses as they were deemed to serve business interests rather than personal pleasure. However, the decision on the disallowance of expenses related to time-share acquisition in a holiday resort was remanded to the AO for further examination to ascertain its nature and business purpose, emphasizing it was not capital expenditure due to the absence of acquiring a physical asset.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=102254" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (12) TMI 220 - ITAT DELHI-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63812</link>
      <description>The ITAT partially allowed the appeal, permitting the deduction of trip expenses as they were deemed to serve business interests rather than personal pleasure. However, the decision on the disallowance of expenses related to time-share acquisition in a holiday resort was remanded to the AO for further examination to ascertain its nature and business purpose, emphasizing it was not capital expenditure due to the absence of acquiring a physical asset.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63812</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>