<?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 (2) TMI 243 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765697</link>
    <description>The Bombay HC ruled on tax authority jurisdiction, financial cost classification, and transaction benchmarking. The court upheld the tribunal&#039;s decisions on book profit revisions under Section 115JB, classified foreclosure costs as capital expenditure, and maintained the original benchmarking method. Interim relief was granted, requiring a partial tax deposit and directing expedited review of the rectification application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2025 18:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=795891" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 243 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765697</link>
      <description>The Bombay HC ruled on tax authority jurisdiction, financial cost classification, and transaction benchmarking. The court upheld the tribunal&#039;s decisions on book profit revisions under Section 115JB, classified foreclosure costs as capital expenditure, and maintained the original benchmarking method. Interim relief was granted, requiring a partial tax deposit and directing expedited review of the rectification application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765697</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>