<?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 1000 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339300</link>
    <description>The ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee on all three issues discussed: disallowance of consultancy charges, disallowance u/s.14A of the Act, and non-granting of deduction towards refurnishing. The expenses for consultancy charges were considered revenue in nature, disallowance u/s.14A was deleted based on fund analysis, and the AO was directed to reconsider the deduction issue. The judgment was pronounced on 10th February 2017.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2017 12:07:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=459577" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 1000 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339300</link>
      <description>The ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee on all three issues discussed: disallowance of consultancy charges, disallowance u/s.14A of the Act, and non-granting of deduction towards refurnishing. The expenses for consultancy charges were considered revenue in nature, disallowance u/s.14A was deleted based on fund analysis, and the AO was directed to reconsider the deduction issue. The judgment was pronounced on 10th February 2017.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339300</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>