<?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>2020 (9) TMI 413 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398294</link>
    <description>The Tribunal admitted additional evidence regarding the MVAT paid by the assessee and directed the AO to verify the veracity of these payments. If verified, the addition should be restricted to 2.5% of the impugned purchases, in line with the ITAT&#039;s decision for A.Y. 2010-11. Consequently, the appeals by the assessee were partly allowed, and the appeals by the Revenue were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2020 15:50:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=622028" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (9) TMI 413 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398294</link>
      <description>The Tribunal admitted additional evidence regarding the MVAT paid by the assessee and directed the AO to verify the veracity of these payments. If verified, the addition should be restricted to 2.5% of the impugned purchases, in line with the ITAT&#039;s decision for A.Y. 2010-11. Consequently, the appeals by the assessee were partly allowed, and the appeals by the Revenue were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398294</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>