<?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 (11) TMI 286 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334268</link>
    <description>The appeal was dismissed, and the disallowance of the commission payment of Rs. 25,05,885/- was upheld by the ITAT. The lack of documentary evidence, inconsistency in claims, and failure to prove the business purpose of the commission payment led to the disallowance. The ITAT emphasized that the burden of proof lies on the assessee to establish business purposes for expenditures, which the assessee failed to do in this case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2016 17:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=447063" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 286 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334268</link>
      <description>The appeal was dismissed, and the disallowance of the commission payment of Rs. 25,05,885/- was upheld by the ITAT. The lack of documentary evidence, inconsistency in claims, and failure to prove the business purpose of the commission payment led to the disallowance. The ITAT emphasized that the burden of proof lies on the assessee to establish business purposes for expenditures, which the assessee failed to do in this case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334268</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>