<?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 (11) TMI 73 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267264</link>
    <description>The High Court modified the ITAT&#039;s order, directing the CIT (A) to independently re-examine whether the appellant was both a trader and an investor without being influenced by the ITAT&#039;s conclusions. The Court clarified it did not express any opinion on the issue, disposing of the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2015 06:16:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=403992" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 73 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267264</link>
      <description>The High Court modified the ITAT&#039;s order, directing the CIT (A) to independently re-examine whether the appellant was both a trader and an investor without being influenced by the ITAT&#039;s conclusions. The Court clarified it did not express any opinion on the issue, disposing of the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267264</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>