<?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 (3) TMI 314 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257378</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s additional ground, permitting the claim of deduction under Section 35D of the Income Tax Act. It determined that the expenses incurred for increasing share capital were revenue expenditure, not capital, due to specific circumstances. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to treat the expenses as revenue expenditure, ultimately allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2026 15:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=378325" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 314 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257378</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s additional ground, permitting the claim of deduction under Section 35D of the Income Tax Act. It determined that the expenses incurred for increasing share capital were revenue expenditure, not capital, due to specific circumstances. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to treat the expenses as revenue expenditure, ultimately allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257378</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>