<?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>2009 (10) TMI 903 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178478</link>
    <description>The court set aside the deletion of penalty related to public issue expenses under section 35D, holding it was rightly imposed by the Assessing Officer. The court remitted the case back to the Tribunal to assess whether the Assessing Officer&#039;s satisfaction could be inferred from the order, guided by principles from a specific case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2016 16:39:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=415559" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (10) TMI 903 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178478</link>
      <description>The court set aside the deletion of penalty related to public issue expenses under section 35D, holding it was rightly imposed by the Assessing Officer. The court remitted the case back to the Tribunal to assess whether the Assessing Officer&#039;s satisfaction could be inferred from the order, guided by principles from a specific case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178478</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>