<?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>1989 (1) TMI 168 - ITAT DELHI-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64235</link>
    <description>The ITAT upheld the disallowance of trading loss due to lack of evidence on the settlement of the dispute with the foreign buyer and absence of proof of RBI permission. However, the denial of deduction under s. 80-G was remitted back to the IAC (Asst) for further examination, as the assessee provided certificates and confirmation letters from Foundations, showing registration under s. 12-A(a) and benefit under s. 11.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Feb 2011 15:49:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=102677" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (1) TMI 168 - ITAT DELHI-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64235</link>
      <description>The ITAT upheld the disallowance of trading loss due to lack of evidence on the settlement of the dispute with the foreign buyer and absence of proof of RBI permission. However, the denial of deduction under s. 80-G was remitted back to the IAC (Asst) for further examination, as the assessee provided certificates and confirmation letters from Foundations, showing registration under s. 12-A(a) and benefit under s. 11.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64235</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>