<?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 (12) TMI 671 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783131</link>
    <description>ITAT allowed the assessee&#039;s claim that CSR-related donations, though disallowed under s.37(1), do not bar deduction under s.80G, as the two operate at different computation stages; denial would result in impermissible double disallowance. The matter was remanded to the AO solely to verify the nature and quantum of eligible donation under s.80G and to grant deduction accordingly. On the short-term capital loss from building, ITAT held that loss is allowable only if the asset sold was the sole asset in its block; otherwise, the sale proceeds merely reduce the block&#039;s WDV under s.50. ITAT upheld CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of addition for alleged excess stock of 24KT gold, finding the purchases genuine and survey mismatch attributable to pending book entries, and dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2025 10:11:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=870418" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (12) TMI 671 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783131</link>
      <description>ITAT allowed the assessee&#039;s claim that CSR-related donations, though disallowed under s.37(1), do not bar deduction under s.80G, as the two operate at different computation stages; denial would result in impermissible double disallowance. The matter was remanded to the AO solely to verify the nature and quantum of eligible donation under s.80G and to grant deduction accordingly. On the short-term capital loss from building, ITAT held that loss is allowable only if the asset sold was the sole asset in its block; otherwise, the sale proceeds merely reduce the block&#039;s WDV under s.50. ITAT upheld CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of addition for alleged excess stock of 24KT gold, finding the purchases genuine and survey mismatch attributable to pending book entries, and dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783131</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>