<?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 923 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238468</link>
    <description>The appellant&#039;s appeal against the rejection of its application u/s.154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2005-06 was dismissed as the Assessing Officer&#039;s decision was deemed conscious and requiring further verification. Regarding specific disallowances under various sections, the Tribunal partially allowed the appeal concerning the disallowance of interest related to interest-free loans to directors, directing a reevaluation by the Assessing Officer. However, the disallowance of rent under sec. 40A(2)(a) was upheld as the appellant failed to demonstrate a clear error in the assessment proceedings. The appellant&#039;s appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes with detailed reasoning provided by the Tribunal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2013 07:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=333239" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (10) TMI 923 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238468</link>
      <description>The appellant&#039;s appeal against the rejection of its application u/s.154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2005-06 was dismissed as the Assessing Officer&#039;s decision was deemed conscious and requiring further verification. Regarding specific disallowances under various sections, the Tribunal partially allowed the appeal concerning the disallowance of interest related to interest-free loans to directors, directing a reevaluation by the Assessing Officer. However, the disallowance of rent under sec. 40A(2)(a) was upheld as the appellant failed to demonstrate a clear error in the assessment proceedings. The appellant&#039;s appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes with detailed reasoning provided by the Tribunal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238468</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>