<?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 (5) TMI 538 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422278</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s order on all disputed issues, dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal. The CIT(A) allowed the deductions for bad debts, unrealized foreign exchange loss, interest paid to others, and commission/brokerage paid to agents based on relevant legal principles and documentation provided by the assessee. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) appropriately considered factual aspects and judicial decisions, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 May 2022 11:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=678883" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (5) TMI 538 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422278</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s order on all disputed issues, dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal. The CIT(A) allowed the deductions for bad debts, unrealized foreign exchange loss, interest paid to others, and commission/brokerage paid to agents based on relevant legal principles and documentation provided by the assessee. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) appropriately considered factual aspects and judicial decisions, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422278</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>