<?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 525 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271820</link>
    <description>The High Court found that the ITAT&#039;s order did not properly address the principle of consistency in treating the petitioner&#039;s interest income. The Court set aside the ITAT&#039;s order and restored the appeal for reconsideration, emphasizing the importance of consistency in the treatment of interest income for the relevant assessment year. The writ petition was disposed of with directions for the ITAT to re-examine the issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 May 2016 18:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=416796" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 525 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271820</link>
      <description>The High Court found that the ITAT&#039;s order did not properly address the principle of consistency in treating the petitioner&#039;s interest income. The Court set aside the ITAT&#039;s order and restored the appeal for reconsideration, emphasizing the importance of consistency in the treatment of interest income for the relevant assessment year. The writ petition was disposed of with directions for the ITAT to re-examine the issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271820</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>