<?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 1117 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327003</link>
    <description>Management charges could not be subjected to an ad hoc 50% tax attribution as fees for technical services without a proper factual basis showing the nature of the services actually rendered; the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication. Business losses arising from closure of the India branch were held eligible for set-off against other heads of income, as the losses remained connected with the winding-up and earlier business activity. Interest under section 234B was not leviable in view of binding jurisdictional precedent, so the levy was rejected. The cross-appeals were therefore disposed of with relief on the loss set-off and interest issues, and reconsideration on the management-charges issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2016 17:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=426123" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 1117 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327003</link>
      <description>Management charges could not be subjected to an ad hoc 50% tax attribution as fees for technical services without a proper factual basis showing the nature of the services actually rendered; the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication. Business losses arising from closure of the India branch were held eligible for set-off against other heads of income, as the losses remained connected with the winding-up and earlier business activity. Interest under section 234B was not leviable in view of binding jurisdictional precedent, so the levy was rejected. The cross-appeals were therefore disposed of with relief on the loss set-off and interest issues, and reconsideration on the management-charges issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327003</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>