<?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 (5) TMI 218 - ITAT DELHI-F</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65344</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, upholding the AO&#039;s disallowance of depreciation on trolleys due to lack of evidence of actual use in business. It directed a fresh assessment of the trading account addition, emphasizing specific additions based on unrecorded sales. The disallowance of expenses under &quot;quantity discount&quot; and professional fees was deleted by the CIT(A) and upheld by the Tribunal, as both were found to be justified and supported by evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2012 14:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=103784" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (5) TMI 218 - ITAT DELHI-F</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65344</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, upholding the AO&#039;s disallowance of depreciation on trolleys due to lack of evidence of actual use in business. It directed a fresh assessment of the trading account addition, emphasizing specific additions based on unrecorded sales. The disallowance of expenses under &quot;quantity discount&quot; and professional fees was deleted by the CIT(A) and upheld by the Tribunal, as both were found to be justified and supported by evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65344</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>