<?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>2017 (1) TMI 673 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337593</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, confirming the allowance of Rs. 22,76,84,554/- as business loss. It allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the issue of Rs. 9,92,48,752/- to the AO for verification. The Tribunal emphasized that the loss should be allowed if it is backed by stock for confirmed export orders, ensuring the revenue impact is tax-neutral. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, and the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2017 09:03:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=455096" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 673 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337593</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, confirming the allowance of Rs. 22,76,84,554/- as business loss. It allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the issue of Rs. 9,92,48,752/- to the AO for verification. The Tribunal emphasized that the loss should be allowed if it is backed by stock for confirmed export orders, ensuring the revenue impact is tax-neutral. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, and the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337593</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>