<?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 (2) TMI 664 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169552</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding the disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2007-08. The Tribunal concurred that Rule 8D was not applicable for that year and approved the 10% disallowance of dividend income as a reasonable expense. The Tribunal emphasized the validity of the High Court&#039;s judgment and rejected the Revenue&#039;s challenge, noting the pending Special Leave Petition before the Apex Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2015 19:30:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=382990" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (2) TMI 664 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169552</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding the disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2007-08. The Tribunal concurred that Rule 8D was not applicable for that year and approved the 10% disallowance of dividend income as a reasonable expense. The Tribunal emphasized the validity of the High Court&#039;s judgment and rejected the Revenue&#039;s challenge, noting the pending Special Leave Petition before the Apex Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169552</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>