<?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 (8) TMI 53 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364581</link>
    <description>The document discusses ITAT Delhi&#039;s treatment of several recurring tax issues. It states that enhancement by the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 40(a)(ia) could not introduce a new disallowance on third-party vendor purchases where that issue was absent from the assessment order, so the enhancement was deleted. It records that sales-tax subsidy was taxable as revenue receipt, while provision for service warranty and royalty for use of technical know-how were allowable as revenue expenditure. It also notes that export commission and denial of deduction under section 80JJAA were upheld, and that the royalty and export commission transfer pricing adjustments were sustained while the AMP issue and sponsorship payment were remanded for fresh adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2018 06:49:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=528982" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 53 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364581</link>
      <description>The document discusses ITAT Delhi&#039;s treatment of several recurring tax issues. It states that enhancement by the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 40(a)(ia) could not introduce a new disallowance on third-party vendor purchases where that issue was absent from the assessment order, so the enhancement was deleted. It records that sales-tax subsidy was taxable as revenue receipt, while provision for service warranty and royalty for use of technical know-how were allowable as revenue expenditure. It also notes that export commission and denial of deduction under section 80JJAA were upheld, and that the royalty and export commission transfer pricing adjustments were sustained while the AMP issue and sponsorship payment were remanded for fresh adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364581</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>