<?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>2000 (4) TMI 167 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68343</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, upholding some disallowances while overturning others. The disallowance of interest expenditure on a residential plot was deleted due to lack of nexus with borrowed funds. Expenses for a new car purchase were partially disallowed for maintenance and depreciation. Expenses for the inauguration of a new showroom were allowed as business promotion expenses. Commission paid to a deceased individual was justified. Unexplained investment in a house property was deemed explained. Expenses related to new tractor expenses were allowed. The Tribunal relied on detailed analysis and justifications provided by the CIT(A) in each case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:42:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=106740" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (4) TMI 167 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68343</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, upholding some disallowances while overturning others. The disallowance of interest expenditure on a residential plot was deleted due to lack of nexus with borrowed funds. Expenses for a new car purchase were partially disallowed for maintenance and depreciation. Expenses for the inauguration of a new showroom were allowed as business promotion expenses. Commission paid to a deceased individual was justified. Unexplained investment in a house property was deemed explained. Expenses related to new tractor expenses were allowed. The Tribunal relied on detailed analysis and justifications provided by the CIT(A) in each case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68343</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>