<?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>2001 (2) TMI 289 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68364</link>
    <description>The Tribunal concluded that the additions made under section 143(1)(a) were not justified as the issues regarding deduction for expenses from incentive bonus and exemption of conveyance allowance were debatable. Therefore, the adjustments were deleted. The Tribunal also upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s direction to examine the conveyance allowance issue during regular assessment. The assessee&#039;s appeal was partially allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 18:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=106760" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 289 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68364</link>
      <description>The Tribunal concluded that the additions made under section 143(1)(a) were not justified as the issues regarding deduction for expenses from incentive bonus and exemption of conveyance allowance were debatable. Therefore, the adjustments were deleted. The Tribunal also upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s direction to examine the conveyance allowance issue during regular assessment. The assessee&#039;s appeal was partially allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68364</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>