<?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 (11) TMI 266 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239089</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 1.5 Crs as business income for the assessment year 2008-2009. The Tribunal found that the amount received from Success Developers Pvt. Ltd. was a refundable security deposit as per the agreement terms, not business income. Additionally, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s argument on the acceptance of additional evidence, stating that the evidence was already on record and did not contravene the rules.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Nov 2013 07:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=334615" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 266 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239089</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 1.5 Crs as business income for the assessment year 2008-2009. The Tribunal found that the amount received from Success Developers Pvt. Ltd. was a refundable security deposit as per the agreement terms, not business income. Additionally, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s argument on the acceptance of additional evidence, stating that the evidence was already on record and did not contravene the rules.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239089</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>