<?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>2017 (5) TMI 1713 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285996</link>
    <description>The ITAT partially allowed the appeal by directing the deletion of the adhoc disallowance of administrative expenses due to lack of specific defects in evidence. However, the disallowance of electricity expenses under section 40A(3) of the IT Act was confirmed as the company did not qualify for exemption under Rule 6DD(b) of the Income-tax Rules 1962. The judgment provided detailed reasoning based on the law&#039;s provisions and presented facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Feb 2020 09:41:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=603065" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 1713 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285996</link>
      <description>The ITAT partially allowed the appeal by directing the deletion of the adhoc disallowance of administrative expenses due to lack of specific defects in evidence. However, the disallowance of electricity expenses under section 40A(3) of the IT Act was confirmed as the company did not qualify for exemption under Rule 6DD(b) of the Income-tax Rules 1962. The judgment provided detailed reasoning based on the law&#039;s provisions and presented facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285996</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>