<?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 (5) TMI 1269 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328288</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal&#039;s decision that the advance paid by the company to the directors was not deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. The Court held that the transaction was in the interests of the company, not the shareholders, and therefore did not qualify as deemed dividend. The Court found no substantial question of law warranting interference and dismissed the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 May 2016 18:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=430126" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 1269 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328288</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal&#039;s decision that the advance paid by the company to the directors was not deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. The Court held that the transaction was in the interests of the company, not the shareholders, and therefore did not qualify as deemed dividend. The Court found no substantial question of law warranting interference and dismissed the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328288</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>