<?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>2010 (10) TMI 1236 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301828</link>
    <description>The appeal by Revenue against the deletion of commission disallowances by the AO was allowed for statistical purposes. The ITAT found that the assessee failed to provide confirmations and evidence of services rendered by most commission recipients. The order was set aside, and the case was remanded for a fresh decision with a proper examination of services rendered by each recipient. Grounds 2 and 3 were dismissed as general prayers without specific adjudication required. The decision was pronounced on 11-10-2010.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2022 10:18:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=676810" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (10) TMI 1236 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301828</link>
      <description>The appeal by Revenue against the deletion of commission disallowances by the AO was allowed for statistical purposes. The ITAT found that the assessee failed to provide confirmations and evidence of services rendered by most commission recipients. The order was set aside, and the case was remanded for a fresh decision with a proper examination of services rendered by each recipient. Grounds 2 and 3 were dismissed as general prayers without specific adjudication required. The decision was pronounced on 11-10-2010.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301828</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>