<?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>2015 (1) TMI 297 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255098</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition related to bad debts claim discrepancy, emphasizing the importance of reconciling figures between different financial documents. The reassessment proceedings legality issue was not addressed due to the academic nature of the cross objection after the main issue was decided in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2015 19:45:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373484" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 297 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255098</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition related to bad debts claim discrepancy, emphasizing the importance of reconciling figures between different financial documents. The reassessment proceedings legality issue was not addressed due to the academic nature of the cross objection after the main issue was decided in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255098</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>