<?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 (2) TMI 431 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271726</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the disallowance of &amp;amp;8377; 35.00 lacs under &#039;commission payments&#039; as the assessee failed to provide concrete evidence of services rendered by the payee, affirming the First Appellate Authority&#039;s decision. The tribunal emphasized the requirement for substantial proof to support business expenditures, leading to the dismissal of the assessee&#039;s appeal against the Assessing Officer&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2016 00:45:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=416447" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 431 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271726</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the disallowance of &amp;amp;8377; 35.00 lacs under &#039;commission payments&#039; as the assessee failed to provide concrete evidence of services rendered by the payee, affirming the First Appellate Authority&#039;s decision. The tribunal emphasized the requirement for substantial proof to support business expenditures, leading to the dismissal of the assessee&#039;s appeal against the Assessing Officer&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271726</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>