<?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 (5) TMI 1888 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296719</link>
    <description>The ITAT Chennai partially allowed the Revenue&#039;s appeals, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions to delete the additions for disallowance under Section 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Rules and Section 36(1)(ii) of the Act for commission paid to the Managing Director. The decisions were based on legal precedents and specific circumstances, with the tribunal emphasizing the AO&#039;s failure to adequately assess the actual expenditure incurred and the justification for the commission payment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2021 08:43:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=651628" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 1888 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296719</link>
      <description>The ITAT Chennai partially allowed the Revenue&#039;s appeals, upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions to delete the additions for disallowance under Section 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Rules and Section 36(1)(ii) of the Act for commission paid to the Managing Director. The decisions were based on legal precedents and specific circumstances, with the tribunal emphasizing the AO&#039;s failure to adequately assess the actual expenditure incurred and the justification for the commission payment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296719</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>