<?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>2024 (11) TMI 152 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761166</link>
    <description>ITAT Mumbai upheld several deductions for a bank while dismissing others. The tribunal allowed staff welfare expenditure for school seat reservations, following HC precedent. No disallowance under section 14A was made as the bank had sufficient interest-free funds. Administrative expenditure disallowance was limited to 1% of exempt income. Broken period interest on securities was allowed as deduction. Revenue recognition on due basis rather than accrual was accepted. Investment loss amortization was permitted. Pension fund contribution excess was allowed following HC decision. However, the tribunal restored the section 36(1)(viii) deduction issue to AO questioning bank&#039;s eligibility. Deferred payment guarantee commission was held taxable when received. Foreign branch income remained taxable with only tax credit available under DTAA.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 14:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=776634" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 152 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761166</link>
      <description>ITAT Mumbai upheld several deductions for a bank while dismissing others. The tribunal allowed staff welfare expenditure for school seat reservations, following HC precedent. No disallowance under section 14A was made as the bank had sufficient interest-free funds. Administrative expenditure disallowance was limited to 1% of exempt income. Broken period interest on securities was allowed as deduction. Revenue recognition on due basis rather than accrual was accepted. Investment loss amortization was permitted. Pension fund contribution excess was allowed following HC decision. However, the tribunal restored the section 36(1)(viii) deduction issue to AO questioning bank&#039;s eligibility. Deferred payment guarantee commission was held taxable when received. Foreign branch income remained taxable with only tax credit available under DTAA.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761166</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>