<?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 (12) TMI 384 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401585</link>
    <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) decision to delete the disallowance under section 40A(3) for Assessment Year 2009-10. The ITAT agreed with CIT(A) that the disallowance was not justified due to lack of evidence supporting purchases by the assessee, ruling in favor of the assessee and dismissing both the Revenue&#039;s appeal and the assessee&#039;s cross objection.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2020 15:14:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=629990" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 384 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401585</link>
      <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) decision to delete the disallowance under section 40A(3) for Assessment Year 2009-10. The ITAT agreed with CIT(A) that the disallowance was not justified due to lack of evidence supporting purchases by the assessee, ruling in favor of the assessee and dismissing both the Revenue&#039;s appeal and the assessee&#039;s cross objection.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401585</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>