<?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>2006 (1) TMI 183 - ITAT DELHI-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64338</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Department&#039;s appeal, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions on all issues. It upheld the allowance of depreciation on furniture and fixtures, deduction under Section 35AB, exclusion of provision for bad and doubtful debts from book profits under Section 115JA, and rejected the disallowance under Section 14A for dividend income. The Tribunal emphasized consistency with prior rulings and the necessity of actual evidence for incurred expenditures.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2024 15:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=102780" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 183 - ITAT DELHI-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64338</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Department&#039;s appeal, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions on all issues. It upheld the allowance of depreciation on furniture and fixtures, deduction under Section 35AB, exclusion of provision for bad and doubtful debts from book profits under Section 115JA, and rejected the disallowance under Section 14A for dividend income. The Tribunal emphasized consistency with prior rulings and the necessity of actual evidence for incurred expenditures.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64338</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>