<?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>2013 (6) TMI 534 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234709</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on two key issues. It restricted the disallowance under Section 14A to 1% of the dividend income, directing the Assessing Officer to adjust the quantum accordingly. Additionally, it found the disallowance under Section 94(7) unjustified, as not all conditions were satisfied, and allowed the appeal on this ground. The Tribunal did not provide a detailed conclusion on the disallowance of expenses related to the calculation of Capital Gain. The order was pronounced on 24.9.10.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2023 12:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=197119" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (6) TMI 534 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234709</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on two key issues. It restricted the disallowance under Section 14A to 1% of the dividend income, directing the Assessing Officer to adjust the quantum accordingly. Additionally, it found the disallowance under Section 94(7) unjustified, as not all conditions were satisfied, and allowed the appeal on this ground. The Tribunal did not provide a detailed conclusion on the disallowance of expenses related to the calculation of Capital Gain. The order was pronounced on 24.9.10.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234709</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>