<?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 (7) TMI 772 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345660</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee. It found that the expenses claimed for compensating clients&#039; losses due to employees&#039; negligence were justifiable under section 37 of the Act and in line with relevant circulars. The Tribunal noted the evidence provided, including bank statements and receipts, supporting the compensatory payments made to clients. Consequently, the additions made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the Ld. CIT (A) were deleted, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Jul 2017 06:42:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=482443" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 772 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345660</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee. It found that the expenses claimed for compensating clients&#039; losses due to employees&#039; negligence were justifiable under section 37 of the Act and in line with relevant circulars. The Tribunal noted the evidence provided, including bank statements and receipts, supporting the compensatory payments made to clients. Consequently, the additions made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the Ld. CIT (A) were deleted, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345660</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>