<?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>2009 (1) TMI 553 - ITAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124829</link>
    <description>Payments made for breach of a stock exchange&#039;s internal rules, bye-laws and trading regulations were held not to be expenditure for an offence or an act prohibited by law, so the Explanation to section 37(1) did not apply and the disallowance was deleted. The section 14A disallowance linked to exempt dividend income, together with the treatment of software expenditure, was directed for fresh examination in light of the relevant Special Bench guidance. Salary expenditure was supported by employee-wise material and no specific defect was shown; an ad hoc reduction based only on lower business income was unjustified, so the disallowance was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Oct 2023 18:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161767" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (1) TMI 553 - ITAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124829</link>
      <description>Payments made for breach of a stock exchange&#039;s internal rules, bye-laws and trading regulations were held not to be expenditure for an offence or an act prohibited by law, so the Explanation to section 37(1) did not apply and the disallowance was deleted. The section 14A disallowance linked to exempt dividend income, together with the treatment of software expenditure, was directed for fresh examination in light of the relevant Special Bench guidance. Salary expenditure was supported by employee-wise material and no specific defect was shown; an ad hoc reduction based only on lower business income was unjustified, so the disallowance was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124829</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>