<?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 (1) TMI 1386 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275959</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, condoning the delay in filing the appeal due to genuine reasons. It held that Rule 8D was not applicable for the relevant assessment year, directing the AO to reconsider disallowance under section 14A based on guidelines from relevant cases. The matter was remanded to the AO for fresh adjudication, allowing the appeal partially and instructing the AO to provide a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to present their case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2018 08:53:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=539276" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 1386 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275959</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, condoning the delay in filing the appeal due to genuine reasons. It held that Rule 8D was not applicable for the relevant assessment year, directing the AO to reconsider disallowance under section 14A based on guidelines from relevant cases. The matter was remanded to the AO for fresh adjudication, allowing the appeal partially and instructing the AO to provide a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to present their case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275959</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>