<?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>2015 (3) TMI 441 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257505</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s order that deleted the disallowance made by the AO under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized that Rule 8D is not applicable retrospectively and that the AO failed to comply with judicial directions and establish a connection between the exempt income and the expenditure incurred. The decision was pronounced in open court on 16/2/2015.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2015 15:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=378627" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 441 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257505</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s order that deleted the disallowance made by the AO under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized that Rule 8D is not applicable retrospectively and that the AO failed to comply with judicial directions and establish a connection between the exempt income and the expenditure incurred. The decision was pronounced in open court on 16/2/2015.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257505</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>