<?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 (10) TMI 78 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413026</link>
    <description>Professional expenditure must be substantiated as wholly and exclusively for business use; where the assessee failed to prove full residential electricity and water costs as professional expense, the disallowance was sustained. Foreign travel claims were also upheld as unsupported, because the vouchers were incomplete and the evidence did not satisfactorily link the full travel period and spend to professional purposes. For the payment to the International Bar Association, the record did not clearly establish the recipient&#039;s business connection or permanent establishment in India, so the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after further evidence. The appeal therefore succeeded only in part, with the remaining additions sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2021 08:56:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=657502" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 78 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413026</link>
      <description>Professional expenditure must be substantiated as wholly and exclusively for business use; where the assessee failed to prove full residential electricity and water costs as professional expense, the disallowance was sustained. Foreign travel claims were also upheld as unsupported, because the vouchers were incomplete and the evidence did not satisfactorily link the full travel period and spend to professional purposes. For the payment to the International Bar Association, the record did not clearly establish the recipient&#039;s business connection or permanent establishment in India, so the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after further evidence. The appeal therefore succeeded only in part, with the remaining additions sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413026</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>