<?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 (2) TMI 70 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338370</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, determining that the expenditure incurred on repair and renovations was revenue in nature and deductible. The Tribunal found that the expenses were for preserving and maintaining the existing asset, not for creating a new asset or enduring advantage. Consequently, the lower authorities&#039; decisions were overturned, and the appeal was granted in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=457283" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 70 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338370</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, determining that the expenditure incurred on repair and renovations was revenue in nature and deductible. The Tribunal found that the expenses were for preserving and maintaining the existing asset, not for creating a new asset or enduring advantage. Consequently, the lower authorities&#039; decisions were overturned, and the appeal was granted in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338370</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>