<?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>2013 (7) TMI 256 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235098</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, disagreeing with the disallowance of traveling expenses incurred by the appellant company for promoting the licensee&#039;s business through on-site training, as per the agreement&#039;s clause 9.6. The Tribunal determined that the expenses were not solely for training the employees of another company, as clarified by additional evidence, and were therefore not subject to the adhoc 50% disallowance imposed by the tax authorities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2013 14:50:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=197508" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (7) TMI 256 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235098</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, disagreeing with the disallowance of traveling expenses incurred by the appellant company for promoting the licensee&#039;s business through on-site training, as per the agreement&#039;s clause 9.6. The Tribunal determined that the expenses were not solely for training the employees of another company, as clarified by additional evidence, and were therefore not subject to the adhoc 50% disallowance imposed by the tax authorities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235098</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>