Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Dividend income was treated at processing as falling under s.10(34) and taxed beyond ₹10 lakh by applying s.115BBDA on the premise that it arose from domestic companies. On evidence showing the dividend was from mutual funds and was necessarily reported in Schedule EI without bifurcation, the Tribunal held that such income squarely falls under s.10(35) and is fully exempt, rendering s.115BBDA inapplicable; the corresponding addition was deleted. On the claimed capital loss, since the first appellate authority had directed verification and allowance if found correct and the supporting documents were on record, no interference was warranted and the ground was allowed for statistical purposes. - ITAT
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
