<?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 (7) TMI 909 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261948</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the revenue&#039;s appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the issue of disallowance of speculation loss to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh examination to determine the principal business of the assessee. However, the addition of expenses for earning exempt income under section 14A of the Act was decided in favor of the assessee, with the Tribunal upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the disallowance due to the lack of a clear nexus between expenditure and exempted income.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2015 06:54:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=391482" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (7) TMI 909 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261948</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the revenue&#039;s appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the issue of disallowance of speculation loss to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh examination to determine the principal business of the assessee. However, the addition of expenses for earning exempt income under section 14A of the Act was decided in favor of the assessee, with the Tribunal upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the disallowance due to the lack of a clear nexus between expenditure and exempted income.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261948</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>