<?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>2011 (4) TMI 840 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209838</link>
    <description>Expenditure relatable to exempt dividend income under section 14A had to be determined on a reasonable basis, and a mechanical ad hoc disallowance could not stand; the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication. Long-term capital loss on sale of shares was not shown to be a bogus or colourable paper transaction because the shares were long-held investments, sold under a documented restructuring, and the Revenue failed to prove sham consideration; the loss was allowed. Amounts written off on loans were treated as a valid bad debt/business loss where the write-off was reflected in the accounts and the lending activity was business income, though limited verification of the debtor&#039;s identity was directed. A provision for doubtful debts was not added back to book profit under section 115JB where the underlying write-off was allowable; the Revenue&#039;s ground failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Jul 2013 11:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183282" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 840 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209838</link>
      <description>Expenditure relatable to exempt dividend income under section 14A had to be determined on a reasonable basis, and a mechanical ad hoc disallowance could not stand; the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication. Long-term capital loss on sale of shares was not shown to be a bogus or colourable paper transaction because the shares were long-held investments, sold under a documented restructuring, and the Revenue failed to prove sham consideration; the loss was allowed. Amounts written off on loans were treated as a valid bad debt/business loss where the write-off was reflected in the accounts and the lending activity was business income, though limited verification of the debtor&#039;s identity was directed. A provision for doubtful debts was not added back to book profit under section 115JB where the underlying write-off was allowable; the Revenue&#039;s ground failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209838</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>