<?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 (11) TMI 1301 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389052</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the ITAT&#039;s decision in deleting the addition on account of disallowance of the assessee&#039;s claim of exemption in respect of profit on sale/redemption of investments. The Court noted that the issues raised were primarily matters of evidence appreciation, and no legal questions were found to arise. The Tribunal&#039;s direction to restrict the disallowance to 25% of Bogus Risk Inspection Survey Expenses was also upheld, emphasizing the significance of evidence and factual considerations in tax dispute resolutions. The Court did not entertain additional questions raised by the Revenue, as they were deemed to be factual rather than legal issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Nov 2019 11:21:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=595716" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 1301 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389052</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the ITAT&#039;s decision in deleting the addition on account of disallowance of the assessee&#039;s claim of exemption in respect of profit on sale/redemption of investments. The Court noted that the issues raised were primarily matters of evidence appreciation, and no legal questions were found to arise. The Tribunal&#039;s direction to restrict the disallowance to 25% of Bogus Risk Inspection Survey Expenses was also upheld, emphasizing the significance of evidence and factual considerations in tax dispute resolutions. The Court did not entertain additional questions raised by the Revenue, as they were deemed to be factual rather than legal issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389052</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>