<?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>2014 (6) TMI 434 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248530</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal against the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to allow service charges, deputation charges, and reimbursement of expenses to the holding company. The Tribunal upheld the expenditure allocations, finding them legitimate and not aimed at tax avoidance. It concluded that the expenses were justified based on detailed examination and upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s orders in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=357515" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 434 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248530</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal against the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to allow service charges, deputation charges, and reimbursement of expenses to the holding company. The Tribunal upheld the expenditure allocations, finding them legitimate and not aimed at tax avoidance. It concluded that the expenses were justified based on detailed examination and upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s orders in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248530</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>