<?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 1364 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240187</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal by upholding the deletion of additions related to bogus purchases and consequential profit. The ground concerning ROC fees was allowed in favor of the revenue, as it was deemed capital expenditure not deductible under the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized the genuineness of the transactions, supported by various evidence, and dismissed the revenue&#039;s grounds based on lack of conclusive evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Nov 2013 23:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=337349" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 1364 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240187</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal by upholding the deletion of additions related to bogus purchases and consequential profit. The ground concerning ROC fees was allowed in favor of the revenue, as it was deemed capital expenditure not deductible under the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized the genuineness of the transactions, supported by various evidence, and dismissed the revenue&#039;s grounds based on lack of conclusive evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240187</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>