<?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>2012 (5) TMI 622 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177209</link>
    <description>The appeal against the revision order under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act was dismissed as academic. The issue regarding the disallowance of employees&#039; contribution to Provident Fund was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for verification. Disallowance of prior period expenses and depreciation on hotel buildings was confirmed. However, the proportionate disallowance of interest on borrowed funds was allowed in full by the Tribunal. The disallowance of interest expenses under Section 14A was directed to be restricted to 1% of the dividend income. Overall, one appeal was dismissed, and another was partly allowed with specific directions for verification and restriction of disallowances.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2017 11:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=411962" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (5) TMI 622 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177209</link>
      <description>The appeal against the revision order under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act was dismissed as academic. The issue regarding the disallowance of employees&#039; contribution to Provident Fund was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for verification. Disallowance of prior period expenses and depreciation on hotel buildings was confirmed. However, the proportionate disallowance of interest on borrowed funds was allowed in full by the Tribunal. The disallowance of interest expenses under Section 14A was directed to be restricted to 1% of the dividend income. Overall, one appeal was dismissed, and another was partly allowed with specific directions for verification and restriction of disallowances.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177209</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>