<?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 (9) TMI 1107 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186337</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee regarding advances from debtors. The Tribunal held that credits introduced in earlier years cannot be assessed as income under sec. 68 for the current assessment year. However, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to disallow 10% of motor car and telephone expenses due to potential personal use, stating that without specific details on usage, the disallowance was justified for an individual assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2016 17:33:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=441146" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (9) TMI 1107 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186337</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee regarding advances from debtors. The Tribunal held that credits introduced in earlier years cannot be assessed as income under sec. 68 for the current assessment year. However, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to disallow 10% of motor car and telephone expenses due to potential personal use, stating that without specific details on usage, the disallowance was justified for an individual assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186337</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>