<?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 (12) TMI 717 - ITAT, COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219702</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal and directing the deletion of the disallowance of Rs.35,41,700 claimed by the assessee for diminution in the value of securities. The Tribunal upheld the deletion of the disallowance of staff welfare expenditure, considering it allowable under sec.40A(9) of the Act. The decision was based on the assessee&#039;s consistent treatment of securities as current investments and the similarity to a liability account for staff welfare contributions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2012 15:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=193072" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 717 - ITAT, COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219702</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal and directing the deletion of the disallowance of Rs.35,41,700 claimed by the assessee for diminution in the value of securities. The Tribunal upheld the deletion of the disallowance of staff welfare expenditure, considering it allowable under sec.40A(9) of the Act. The decision was based on the assessee&#039;s consistent treatment of securities as current investments and the similarity to a liability account for staff welfare contributions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219702</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>