<?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 (10) TMI 475 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238020</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed both appeals of the assessee. It allowed the claim of bad debt for loss on repossessed assets, holding that the loss was incurred in the business of financing and lending. Additionally, the Tribunal directed a re-examination of the disallowance of expenses under section 14A without applying Rule 8D, following the principles laid down by the High Court of Bombay.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Oct 2013 11:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=308641" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (10) TMI 475 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238020</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed both appeals of the assessee. It allowed the claim of bad debt for loss on repossessed assets, holding that the loss was incurred in the business of financing and lending. Additionally, the Tribunal directed a re-examination of the disallowance of expenses under section 14A without applying Rule 8D, following the principles laid down by the High Court of Bombay.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238020</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>