<?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>Stock exchange compliance charges qualify as deductible business expenditure; bona fide cess claims cannot trigger under-reporting penalties.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=103908</link>
    <description>Stock exchange charges for delivery, reporting, margin and other operational or procedural lapses were treated by the ITAT as non-statutory compensatory payments incurred to secure compliance under exchange bye-laws and regulations. Their description as penalties or fines in the tax audit report did not make them expenditure for an offence or a purpose prohibited by law under Explanation 1 to section 37(1); the disallowance was deleted. A deduction claim for health and education cess, made in good faith under prevailing jurisdictional High Court law, did not become under-reporting or misreporting merely because a later retrospective amendment disallowed it. The related penalty was therefore deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2026 07:31:58 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2026 07:32:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=923905" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Stock exchange compliance charges qualify as deductible business expenditure; bona fide cess claims cannot trigger under-reporting penalties.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=103908</link>
      <description>Stock exchange charges for delivery, reporting, margin and other operational or procedural lapses were treated by the ITAT as non-statutory compensatory payments incurred to secure compliance under exchange bye-laws and regulations. Their description as penalties or fines in the tax audit report did not make them expenditure for an offence or a purpose prohibited by law under Explanation 1 to section 37(1); the disallowance was deleted. A deduction claim for health and education cess, made in good faith under prevailing jurisdictional High Court law, did not become under-reporting or misreporting merely because a later retrospective amendment disallowed it. The related penalty was therefore deleted.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2026 07:31:58 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=103908</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>