<?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>2012 (12) TMI 608 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219593</link>
    <description>Accommodation-related and other employee amenity additions were rejected where the factual findings showed that the employer had not provided the alleged perquisites and the assessments were made on estimate; the deletions were sustained. Exemption under section 10(13A) was allowed because the salary receipts could not be recharacterised as income from other sources in the absence of material denying an employer-employee relationship, so the rent-related allowance remained eligible within statutory limits. Interest paid on borrowing for land purchase was set off against interest received on delayed sale proceeds from the same counterparty because both arose from one integrated transaction with a direct nexus, and taxability had to be computed on real net income; the set-off was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2012 08:55:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192963" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 608 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219593</link>
      <description>Accommodation-related and other employee amenity additions were rejected where the factual findings showed that the employer had not provided the alleged perquisites and the assessments were made on estimate; the deletions were sustained. Exemption under section 10(13A) was allowed because the salary receipts could not be recharacterised as income from other sources in the absence of material denying an employer-employee relationship, so the rent-related allowance remained eligible within statutory limits. Interest paid on borrowing for land purchase was set off against interest received on delayed sale proceeds from the same counterparty because both arose from one integrated transaction with a direct nexus, and taxability had to be computed on real net income; the set-off was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219593</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>