<?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>2012 (7) TMI 104 - ITAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214529</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)&#039; decisions in a tax case. The addition made under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act was deleted as the assessee provided satisfactory explanations and evidence regarding the investment. Additionally, preliminary and establishment expenses were allowed as the business had commenced within the relevant financial year, following the Delhi High Court&#039;s precedent. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the decisions on both issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=187923" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (7) TMI 104 - ITAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214529</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)&#039; decisions in a tax case. The addition made under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act was deleted as the assessee provided satisfactory explanations and evidence regarding the investment. Additionally, preliminary and establishment expenses were allowed as the business had commenced within the relevant financial year, following the Delhi High Court&#039;s precedent. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the decisions on both issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214529</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>