<?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>2023 (3) TMI 1425 - ITAT NEW DLEHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310951</link>
    <description>ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the banking assessee on multiple issues. The tribunal held that Section 14A disallowance was not applicable as shares were held as stock-in-trade, making income business-related. Full depreciation on temporary wooden structures and partitions was allowed as these were not permanent constructions. Software expenses were treated as revenue expenditure following Delhi HC precedent. Amortization of premium on HTM securities was permitted under RBI regulations. Bad debt write-off under Section 36(1)(vii) was allowed with proper accounting treatment. MAT provisions under Section 115JB were not applicable to banking companies, and provisions for bad debts were allowable. Loss on amortization of investments was held as actual business loss, not notional provision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2023 06:09:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=733101" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (3) TMI 1425 - ITAT NEW DLEHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310951</link>
      <description>ITAT Delhi ruled in favor of the banking assessee on multiple issues. The tribunal held that Section 14A disallowance was not applicable as shares were held as stock-in-trade, making income business-related. Full depreciation on temporary wooden structures and partitions was allowed as these were not permanent constructions. Software expenses were treated as revenue expenditure following Delhi HC precedent. Amortization of premium on HTM securities was permitted under RBI regulations. Bad debt write-off under Section 36(1)(vii) was allowed with proper accounting treatment. MAT provisions under Section 115JB were not applicable to banking companies, and provisions for bad debts were allowable. Loss on amortization of investments was held as actual business loss, not notional provision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310951</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>