<?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>2014 (8) TMI 1090 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189244</link>
    <description>The appeal challenging the order for the assessment year 2009-10 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act was filed two days late but the delay was condoned. The main issue was the disallowance of Rs. 15,89,295 under section 14A for exempt income based on rule 8D. The Tribunal found the disallowance unjustified as specific expenses related to earning exempt income were not identified. Consequently, the disallowance under rule 8D was deleted, and the assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2017 09:47:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453874" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (8) TMI 1090 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189244</link>
      <description>The appeal challenging the order for the assessment year 2009-10 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act was filed two days late but the delay was condoned. The main issue was the disallowance of Rs. 15,89,295 under section 14A for exempt income based on rule 8D. The Tribunal found the disallowance unjustified as specific expenses related to earning exempt income were not identified. Consequently, the disallowance under rule 8D was deleted, and the assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189244</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>