<?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 (11) TMI 1004 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370661</link>
    <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) partially allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal, dismissing the challenge against the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ITAT upheld the treatment of income received under the Amenities Agreement as &#039;Income from Other Sources&#039; and disallowed certain expenses claimed by the appellant. However, the ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to allow the business loss claimed by the appellant, emphasizing that the expenses were routine nominal expenses to maintain corporate status. The challenge regarding the computation of interest charged under sections 234B/234C was not elaborated upon in the judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2018 18:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=543047" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 1004 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370661</link>
      <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) partially allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal, dismissing the challenge against the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ITAT upheld the treatment of income received under the Amenities Agreement as &#039;Income from Other Sources&#039; and disallowed certain expenses claimed by the appellant. However, the ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to allow the business loss claimed by the appellant, emphasizing that the expenses were routine nominal expenses to maintain corporate status. The challenge regarding the computation of interest charged under sections 234B/234C was not elaborated upon in the judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370661</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>