<?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>2014 (1) TMI 931 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242715</link>
    <description>Interest, miscellaneous income and liabilities no longer required were not accepted as business income for set-off of brought forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation, particularly where the claim had not been specifically urged before the first appellate authority. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the appellate finding on the basis advanced. The claimed benefit of section 115JB as a sick industrial company was also unavailable because the statutory proviso depended on acceptance of sick status by the competent authority, and the record showed that the claim had been rejected by the BIFR and was not finally accepted in the assessee&#039;s favour.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 Jan 2014 09:49:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=343145" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 931 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242715</link>
      <description>Interest, miscellaneous income and liabilities no longer required were not accepted as business income for set-off of brought forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation, particularly where the claim had not been specifically urged before the first appellate authority. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the appellate finding on the basis advanced. The claimed benefit of section 115JB as a sick industrial company was also unavailable because the statutory proviso depended on acceptance of sick status by the competent authority, and the record showed that the claim had been rejected by the BIFR and was not finally accepted in the assessee&#039;s favour.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242715</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>