<?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 (4) TMI 502 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117034</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that T.V. Sets qualified as &#039;plant&#039; for depreciation purposes under section 32AB, entitling the assessee to higher depreciation and deduction. However, the appeal was unsuccessful regarding the treatment of entertainment expenses, with the Tribunal upholding the allocation of expenses between employees and entertainment as determined by the CIT(A).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2012 17:11:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154032" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (4) TMI 502 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117034</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that T.V. Sets qualified as &#039;plant&#039; for depreciation purposes under section 32AB, entitling the assessee to higher depreciation and deduction. However, the appeal was unsuccessful regarding the treatment of entertainment expenses, with the Tribunal upholding the allocation of expenses between employees and entertainment as determined by the CIT(A).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117034</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>