<?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>2010 (11) TMI 141 - ITAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203325</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions, ruling that the payments were security deposits, not deemed dividends under Section 2(22)(e). Share transfers were deemed genuine, and accrued interest was considered notional, leading to the dismissal of all Revenue appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 May 2011 13:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176887" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (11) TMI 141 - ITAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203325</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions, ruling that the payments were security deposits, not deemed dividends under Section 2(22)(e). Share transfers were deemed genuine, and accrued interest was considered notional, leading to the dismissal of all Revenue appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203325</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>