<?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>2019 (4) TMI 2142 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311884</link>
    <description>The ITAT Ahmedabad ruled on multiple tax issues. The tribunal allowed training expenses paid to Prasanna Trust as revenue expenditure u/s 37(1), finding no evidence of trust formation payments. Technical know-how fees were held as revenue expenditure based on previous ITAT decisions. Transfer pricing additions were remanded to CIT(A) for recomputation using TNMM method instead of CUP. Various income items including forex gains, scrap sales, and DEPB income were held eligible for section 80HHC deduction as business income. Building repair expenses were treated as revenue expenditure. The tribunal dismissed appeals regarding scientific research deduction and insurance reimbursement claims due to insufficient evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2024 22:02:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=740546" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 2142 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311884</link>
      <description>The ITAT Ahmedabad ruled on multiple tax issues. The tribunal allowed training expenses paid to Prasanna Trust as revenue expenditure u/s 37(1), finding no evidence of trust formation payments. Technical know-how fees were held as revenue expenditure based on previous ITAT decisions. Transfer pricing additions were remanded to CIT(A) for recomputation using TNMM method instead of CUP. Various income items including forex gains, scrap sales, and DEPB income were held eligible for section 80HHC deduction as business income. Building repair expenses were treated as revenue expenditure. The tribunal dismissed appeals regarding scientific research deduction and insurance reimbursement claims due to insufficient evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311884</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>