<?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 (8) TMI 566 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410988</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals for both assessment years for statistical purposes. It remitted the jurisdictional issue back to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination and speaking order. The merits of the disallowance under Section 14A were decided in favor of the assessee, highlighting the debatable nature of the issue and the lack of jurisdiction for rectification under Section 154.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2021 21:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=652725" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (8) TMI 566 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410988</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals for both assessment years for statistical purposes. It remitted the jurisdictional issue back to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination and speaking order. The merits of the disallowance under Section 14A were decided in favor of the assessee, highlighting the debatable nature of the issue and the lack of jurisdiction for rectification under Section 154.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410988</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>