<?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>2021 (5) TMI 762 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407883</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, reducing the profit element on alleged bogus purchases from 9% to 1% based on evidence provided by the assessee, considering gross profit ratios from previous years. The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of 10% on conveyance, telephone, and traveling expenses due to lack of concrete evidence refuting personal elements in these expenses. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was grounded in legal precedents and a comprehensive evaluation of the case facts and evidence presented.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 May 2021 08:38:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=645060" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (5) TMI 762 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407883</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, reducing the profit element on alleged bogus purchases from 9% to 1% based on evidence provided by the assessee, considering gross profit ratios from previous years. The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of 10% on conveyance, telephone, and traveling expenses due to lack of concrete evidence refuting personal elements in these expenses. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was grounded in legal precedents and a comprehensive evaluation of the case facts and evidence presented.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407883</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>