<?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>2016 (7) TMI 1439 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272590</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that no disallowance of interest on loans to subsidiaries was warranted as loans were for commercial reasons and the assessee had sufficient interest-free funds. Disallowance under section 14A for interest expenses related to tax-free income was also rejected as the assessee had enough interest-free funds for investments. The Tribunal allowed full lease rental deductions for depreciation on leased assets and deleted disallowances for payments to contractors and consultation fees to a foreign entity. The disallowance of sales tax liability was allowed only if paid within the stipulated period. Other grounds were dismissed as not requiring adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2020 07:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=519673" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 1439 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272590</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that no disallowance of interest on loans to subsidiaries was warranted as loans were for commercial reasons and the assessee had sufficient interest-free funds. Disallowance under section 14A for interest expenses related to tax-free income was also rejected as the assessee had enough interest-free funds for investments. The Tribunal allowed full lease rental deductions for depreciation on leased assets and deleted disallowances for payments to contractors and consultation fees to a foreign entity. The disallowance of sales tax liability was allowed only if paid within the stipulated period. Other grounds were dismissed as not requiring adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272590</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>