<?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 (4) TMI 1139 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186323</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the ld CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete additions related to unproved purchases and expenses, dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal. The AO&#039;s additions were found arbitrary and lacking proper justification, leading to the deletion of the disputed amounts. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of proper verification and justification for disallowances, ultimately siding with the assessee in both issues. The decision was made on April 30, 2010.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2016 15:25:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=441130" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (4) TMI 1139 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186323</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the ld CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete additions related to unproved purchases and expenses, dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal. The AO&#039;s additions were found arbitrary and lacking proper justification, leading to the deletion of the disputed amounts. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of proper verification and justification for disallowances, ultimately siding with the assessee in both issues. The decision was made on April 30, 2010.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186323</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>