<?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>2018 (3) TMI 1312 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357609</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions on all issues. The warehouse rent was rightly treated as business income, the commission payments to related parties were justified, and the higher depreciation rate on electrical installations was appropriate. The judgment emphasized the importance of the true nature of activities, consistency in tax treatment, and the necessity of substantiating claims with evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2018 08:38:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=514672" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 1312 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357609</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions on all issues. The warehouse rent was rightly treated as business income, the commission payments to related parties were justified, and the higher depreciation rate on electrical installations was appropriate. The judgment emphasized the importance of the true nature of activities, consistency in tax treatment, and the necessity of substantiating claims with evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357609</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>