<?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>2022 (1) TMI 649 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417184</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal and partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals. The disallowance of provision for replacement of batteries was reduced to 7% of alleged bogus purchases. Sales promotion expenses disallowance was entirely deleted, emphasizing the necessity in business. Disallowance of donations to political parties and charitable institutions was rejected, highlighting the donors&#039; lack of responsibility for donees&#039; fund use. Travelling expenses disallowance was partially upheld due to insufficient business purpose evidence. The understatement of closing stock addition was deleted, emphasizing the flawed method used by the AO.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 14:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=667388" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 649 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417184</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal and partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals. The disallowance of provision for replacement of batteries was reduced to 7% of alleged bogus purchases. Sales promotion expenses disallowance was entirely deleted, emphasizing the necessity in business. Disallowance of donations to political parties and charitable institutions was rejected, highlighting the donors&#039; lack of responsibility for donees&#039; fund use. Travelling expenses disallowance was partially upheld due to insufficient business purpose evidence. The understatement of closing stock addition was deleted, emphasizing the flawed method used by the AO.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417184</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>