<?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>2016 (2) TMI 497 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271792</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the Rs. 2 crores received was part of a commercial transaction and not a deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the I.T. Act. The transaction was deemed a reimbursement for printing labor charges, supported by past business dealings and adjustments against bills. Following the precedent set by the Hon&#039;ble Delhi High Court, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the addition, allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2016 06:58:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=416695" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 497 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271792</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the Rs. 2 crores received was part of a commercial transaction and not a deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the I.T. Act. The transaction was deemed a reimbursement for printing labor charges, supported by past business dealings and adjustments against bills. Following the precedent set by the Hon&#039;ble Delhi High Court, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the addition, allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271792</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>