<?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>2011 (7) TMI 1230 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182323</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellant, directing the deletion of the disallowance of expenses under section 14A of the Act and allowing the provision for warranty claim. The treatment of capital expenditure as revenue expenses was remitted back to the AO for further examination. Additionally, the Tribunal confirmed the deletion of the addition made under section 145A of the Act, based on the exclusive method of accounting followed by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 May 2016 17:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427337" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 1230 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182323</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellant, directing the deletion of the disallowance of expenses under section 14A of the Act and allowing the provision for warranty claim. The treatment of capital expenditure as revenue expenses was remitted back to the AO for further examination. Additionally, the Tribunal confirmed the deletion of the addition made under section 145A of the Act, based on the exclusive method of accounting followed by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182323</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>