<?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 (2) TMI 975 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256975</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, allowing the interest deduction, foreign traveling expenses, and classifying income from delivery-based share transactions as short-term capital gain. The Tribunal found the term loan and foreign travel were for business purposes, and share transactions were not considered frequent or substantial enough to be classified as business income. Relying on judicial precedents, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2015 13:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=377035" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (2) TMI 975 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256975</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, allowing the interest deduction, foreign traveling expenses, and classifying income from delivery-based share transactions as short-term capital gain. The Tribunal found the term loan and foreign travel were for business purposes, and share transactions were not considered frequent or substantial enough to be classified as business income. Relying on judicial precedents, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256975</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>