<?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 (5) TMI 1839 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279081</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee, directing the AO to assess loss from derivative transactions as a business loss, accept short term capital loss from delivery-based share transactions, allow set off of losses against other income, review interest expenditure based on loan use, and recognize the change of self-occupied property chosen by the assessee. The ITAT disagreed with the lower authorities&#039; treatment of losses, interest expenditure, and self-occupied property selection, setting aside their orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2019 13:31:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=560808" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 1839 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279081</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee, directing the AO to assess loss from derivative transactions as a business loss, accept short term capital loss from delivery-based share transactions, allow set off of losses against other income, review interest expenditure based on loan use, and recognize the change of self-occupied property chosen by the assessee. The ITAT disagreed with the lower authorities&#039; treatment of losses, interest expenditure, and self-occupied property selection, setting aside their orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279081</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>