<?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 790 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343052</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the ITAT&#039;s decision to delete additions totaling Rs. 80,70,861 made by the Assessing Officer for AY 2010-11. The ITAT found expenses were incurred for business purposes, not subject to penalty, supported by vouchers, and not involving personal elements. The ITAT also ruled that TDS deduction was not applicable to the appellant&#039;s truck rentals. The High Court dismissed the appeal, stating it lacked merit and did not raise any substantial question of law, with no costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 May 2017 07:31:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=468969" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 790 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343052</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the ITAT&#039;s decision to delete additions totaling Rs. 80,70,861 made by the Assessing Officer for AY 2010-11. The ITAT found expenses were incurred for business purposes, not subject to penalty, supported by vouchers, and not involving personal elements. The ITAT also ruled that TDS deduction was not applicable to the appellant&#039;s truck rentals. The High Court dismissed the appeal, stating it lacked merit and did not raise any substantial question of law, with no costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343052</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>