<?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 (8) TMI 332 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118118</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals of both the assessee and the Revenue. It denied the deduction under section 36(1)(viii) for interest on investments and deposits and guarantee fees, classified certain interest income as business income, and allowed the deduction for bad and doubtful debts under section 36(1)(viia)(c). The AO was directed to re-examine expenses related to the business income classification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2024 10:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155115" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (8) TMI 332 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118118</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals of both the assessee and the Revenue. It denied the deduction under section 36(1)(viii) for interest on investments and deposits and guarantee fees, classified certain interest income as business income, and allowed the deduction for bad and doubtful debts under section 36(1)(viia)(c). The AO was directed to re-examine expenses related to the business income classification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118118</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>