<?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 (8) TMI 400 - ITAT DELHI-F</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65406</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, overturning several disallowances by the AO. It directed the AO to grant deductions for DEPB credits under Section 80HHC(3) but denied deductions for profits on DEPB sales. The exclusion of excess provision written back was reversed, treating it as business profit. Gifts given at marriage ceremonies were deemed business expenses. Disallowances for hydro power project expenses and website development were deleted, treating them as revenue expenditures. The delayed PF payment disallowance was also deleted, following the Delhi HC&#039;s precedent. Certain expenses under Section 37(1) were remitted for further evaluation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2026 16:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=103845" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 400 - ITAT DELHI-F</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65406</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, overturning several disallowances by the AO. It directed the AO to grant deductions for DEPB credits under Section 80HHC(3) but denied deductions for profits on DEPB sales. The exclusion of excess provision written back was reversed, treating it as business profit. Gifts given at marriage ceremonies were deemed business expenses. Disallowances for hydro power project expenses and website development were deleted, treating them as revenue expenditures. The delayed PF payment disallowance was also deleted, following the Delhi HC&#039;s precedent. Certain expenses under Section 37(1) were remitted for further evaluation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65406</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>