<?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 (4) TMI 301 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326187</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, relieving them of the ad-hoc disallowance of business expenses and directing a re-examination of the sundry creditors&#039; ageing analysis. However, the addition on account of purchases from suspicious dealers was upheld. The Tribunal emphasized the genuineness of the expenses and lack of evidence regarding the purchases from suspicious dealers. The decision was pronounced on 01/03/2016.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2016 12:19:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=423084" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 301 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326187</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, relieving them of the ad-hoc disallowance of business expenses and directing a re-examination of the sundry creditors&#039; ageing analysis. However, the addition on account of purchases from suspicious dealers was upheld. The Tribunal emphasized the genuineness of the expenses and lack of evidence regarding the purchases from suspicious dealers. The decision was pronounced on 01/03/2016.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326187</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>