<?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>2010 (11) TMI 995 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181698</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, emphasizing that any disallowances by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) for unsupported expenses must be based on material evidence and not arbitrary figures. As the A.O. failed to provide a basis for the disallowances on repair and maintenance, business promotion, and traveling expenses, the tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order and deleted the additions, ruling in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 10:46:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=424820" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (11) TMI 995 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181698</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, emphasizing that any disallowances by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) for unsupported expenses must be based on material evidence and not arbitrary figures. As the A.O. failed to provide a basis for the disallowances on repair and maintenance, business promotion, and traveling expenses, the tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order and deleted the additions, ruling in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181698</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>