<?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 (11) TMI 637 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350758</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decisions of the CIT(A) and AO in disallowing depreciation on furniture and fixtures, interest on office/home loan, and service tax paid by the assessee. The disallowances were based on factual findings and insufficient evidence provided. The Tribunal emphasized the need for proper documentation to support claims and highlighted that consistency with previous years may not apply when new facts emerge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2017 22:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=495616" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 637 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350758</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decisions of the CIT(A) and AO in disallowing depreciation on furniture and fixtures, interest on office/home loan, and service tax paid by the assessee. The disallowances were based on factual findings and insufficient evidence provided. The Tribunal emphasized the need for proper documentation to support claims and highlighted that consistency with previous years may not apply when new facts emerge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>