<?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 (12) TMI 886 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241221</link>
    <description>The appeal by the Revenue was partly allowed for statistical purposes. The issue of disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) was remitted back for fresh consideration by the Assessing Officer due to lack of verification on agreements and DTAA definitions. The disallowance under Section 14A was upheld based on a previous ruling, and the Revenue&#039;s grievance on this ground was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Dec 2013 06:10:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=339910" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 886 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241221</link>
      <description>The appeal by the Revenue was partly allowed for statistical purposes. The issue of disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) was remitted back for fresh consideration by the Assessing Officer due to lack of verification on agreements and DTAA definitions. The disallowance under Section 14A was upheld based on a previous ruling, and the Revenue&#039;s grievance on this ground was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241221</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>