<?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 (4) TMI 310 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326196</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s decisions on all three issues. The Tribunal&#039;s determinations regarding the rental income addition, interest on the loan borrowed, and the advance received as deemed dividend were found to be justified. The Court ruled that no substantial questions of law arose for consideration, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=423093" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 310 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326196</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s decisions on all three issues. The Tribunal&#039;s determinations regarding the rental income addition, interest on the loan borrowed, and the advance received as deemed dividend were found to be justified. The Court ruled that no substantial questions of law arose for consideration, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326196</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>