<?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 (3) TMI 1868 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469791</link>
    <description>For assessment years before insertion of section 23(5), unsold flats held as stock-in-trade by a builder were not to be taxed on a notional annual letting value merely because they remained vacant, and the Tribunal followed its earlier coordinate-bench view in deleting the deemed-rent addition. The Tribunal also sustained a restricted disallowance under section 14A where the assessee had ed an additional amount in settlement proceedings and the first appellate authority limited the disallowance accordingly. It further treated the payment to a municipal authority for regularisation of a club-house extension as a revenue expenditure under section 37(1), since it was not regarded as a penal outgo, and deleted the disallowance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2026 19:00:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=909921" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1868 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469791</link>
      <description>For assessment years before insertion of section 23(5), unsold flats held as stock-in-trade by a builder were not to be taxed on a notional annual letting value merely because they remained vacant, and the Tribunal followed its earlier coordinate-bench view in deleting the deemed-rent addition. The Tribunal also sustained a restricted disallowance under section 14A where the assessee had ed an additional amount in settlement proceedings and the first appellate authority limited the disallowance accordingly. It further treated the payment to a municipal authority for regularisation of a club-house extension as a revenue expenditure under section 37(1), since it was not regarded as a penal outgo, and deleted the disallowance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469791</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>