<?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>1991 (2) TMI 178 - ITAT BOMBAY-D</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58898</link>
    <description>The Tribunal addressed various issues, including the disallowance of excess processing charges under Section 40A(2), addition on account of free samples distributed, disallowance of interest on deposit accounts of employees, and addition due to alleged under-valuation of finished goods. The Tribunal directed further scrutiny on the excess processing charges, allowed the appeal regarding the addition for free samples distributed, deleted the disallowance of interest on deposit accounts, and upheld the addition for under-valuation of finished goods. The Tribunal dismissed the miscellaneous application, emphasizing the need for re-examination by the IAC without finding any mistake of law or fact requiring rectification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Dec 2010 16:49:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=97353" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (2) TMI 178 - ITAT BOMBAY-D</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58898</link>
      <description>The Tribunal addressed various issues, including the disallowance of excess processing charges under Section 40A(2), addition on account of free samples distributed, disallowance of interest on deposit accounts of employees, and addition due to alleged under-valuation of finished goods. The Tribunal directed further scrutiny on the excess processing charges, allowed the appeal regarding the addition for free samples distributed, deleted the disallowance of interest on deposit accounts, and upheld the addition for under-valuation of finished goods. The Tribunal dismissed the miscellaneous application, emphasizing the need for re-examination by the IAC without finding any mistake of law or fact requiring rectification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58898</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>