<?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 (6) TMI 529 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328820</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, directing deletion of disallowances under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and Rule 8D(2)(iii) as the assessee&#039;s own funds exceeded investments, rendering disallowance unjustified. Citing relevant High Court decisions, the Tribunal found the AO overlooked strategic investments and directed deletion of said disallowances.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2016 09:33:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=431516" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 529 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328820</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, directing deletion of disallowances under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and Rule 8D(2)(iii) as the assessee&#039;s own funds exceeded investments, rendering disallowance unjustified. Citing relevant High Court decisions, the Tribunal found the AO overlooked strategic investments and directed deletion of said disallowances.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328820</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>