<?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>2019 (9) TMI 4 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385236</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeals, affirming that the loans received by the assessee companies were genuine and not unexplained cash credits. Consequently, the interest expenses claimed on these loans were allowed. The CIT(A)&#039;s decision was upheld, and the Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer had not provided sufficient evidence to refute the documentary evidence presented by the assessee companies.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2019 07:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=585640" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 4 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385236</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeals, affirming that the loans received by the assessee companies were genuine and not unexplained cash credits. Consequently, the interest expenses claimed on these loans were allowed. The CIT(A)&#039;s decision was upheld, and the Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer had not provided sufficient evidence to refute the documentary evidence presented by the assessee companies.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385236</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>