<?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>2011 (2) TMI 61 - ITAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202881</link>
    <description>Notional interest on interest-free security deposits could not be added to actual rent when computing annual value of property income, because annual value must be based on the rent actually received and cannot be enhanced without statutory basis. Carried forward business loss was allowed to be set off against dividend income where the shares were held as stock-in-trade, since the commercial character of the receipt prevailed for the purpose of section 72 notwithstanding its separate tax treatment under another head. The revenue challenge failed on the first issue and the assessee obtained relief on the set-off issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2011 08:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176453" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 61 - ITAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202881</link>
      <description>Notional interest on interest-free security deposits could not be added to actual rent when computing annual value of property income, because annual value must be based on the rent actually received and cannot be enhanced without statutory basis. Carried forward business loss was allowed to be set off against dividend income where the shares were held as stock-in-trade, since the commercial character of the receipt prevailed for the purpose of section 72 notwithstanding its separate tax treatment under another head. The revenue challenge failed on the first issue and the assessee obtained relief on the set-off issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202881</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>