<?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 (5) TMI 165 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342427</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the addition of Rs. 9,36,000 as bogus purchases while sustaining the disallowance on account of GP. It also deleted the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) but upheld the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 May 2017 07:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=467489" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 165 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342427</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the addition of Rs. 9,36,000 as bogus purchases while sustaining the disallowance on account of GP. It also deleted the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) but upheld the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342427</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>