<?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 (5) TMI 787 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259913</link>
    <description>Deduction claims require evidence of the nature, purpose and quantum of expenditure; where supporting material is incomplete, the matter may be remanded for verification. Cash staff-gift payments, sponsorship and business promotion outgoings, repair and maintenance expenses, miscellaneous expenses and electricity charges were either sent back for fresh examination or disallowed where the assessee failed to substantiate its explanation. Short receipt in group bookings was treated as suppression of revenue, director remuneration was sustained for lack of proof of services, and disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D was upheld because no contrary evidence showed that no exempt-income related expenditure had been incurred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 May 2015 07:47:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=385972" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 787 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259913</link>
      <description>Deduction claims require evidence of the nature, purpose and quantum of expenditure; where supporting material is incomplete, the matter may be remanded for verification. Cash staff-gift payments, sponsorship and business promotion outgoings, repair and maintenance expenses, miscellaneous expenses and electricity charges were either sent back for fresh examination or disallowed where the assessee failed to substantiate its explanation. Short receipt in group bookings was treated as suppression of revenue, director remuneration was sustained for lack of proof of services, and disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D was upheld because no contrary evidence showed that no exempt-income related expenditure had been incurred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259913</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>