<?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>2016 (1) TMI 929 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271137</link>
    <description>The ITAT dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee against the CIT(A)&#039;s order confirming the assessment order disallowing a sum under sec. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, but the ITAT upheld the disallowance, stating that it applies to both payable and paid expenditures based on the jurisdictional High Court&#039;s precedent. The ITAT found no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, ultimately affirming it on October 7, 2015.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2016 10:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=414401" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 929 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271137</link>
      <description>The ITAT dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee against the CIT(A)&#039;s order confirming the assessment order disallowing a sum under sec. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, but the ITAT upheld the disallowance, stating that it applies to both payable and paid expenditures based on the jurisdictional High Court&#039;s precedent. The ITAT found no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)&#039;s decision, ultimately affirming it on October 7, 2015.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271137</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>