<?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>2025 (1) TMI 381 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764319</link>
    <description>The ITAT Delhi ruled on multiple tax issues. CSR expenditure was allowed as business expenditure, finding it brings goodwill despite lacking direct business nexus. The tribunal rejected the assessee&#039;s claim for LTCG cost adjustment due to business impairment loss, requiring actual acquisition cost from 1999-00. Penalty payments for wrong CENVAT utilization were disallowed as prohibited expenditure under Section 37. Delayed PF/ESI contributions were disallowed following Supreme Court precedent in Checkmate Service. Inventory loss additions were upheld based on prior tribunal decisions. Traffic challans and customer deposit disallowances were decided favorably for the assessee following earlier rulings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 May 2025 15:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=787170" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 381 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764319</link>
      <description>The ITAT Delhi ruled on multiple tax issues. CSR expenditure was allowed as business expenditure, finding it brings goodwill despite lacking direct business nexus. The tribunal rejected the assessee&#039;s claim for LTCG cost adjustment due to business impairment loss, requiring actual acquisition cost from 1999-00. Penalty payments for wrong CENVAT utilization were disallowed as prohibited expenditure under Section 37. Delayed PF/ESI contributions were disallowed following Supreme Court precedent in Checkmate Service. Inventory loss additions were upheld based on prior tribunal decisions. Traffic challans and customer deposit disallowances were decided favorably for the assessee following earlier rulings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764319</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>