<?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>2011 (1) TMI 1466 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186202</link>
    <description>Exempt interest accrued on earlier investment in RBI tax free relief bonds did not justify an ad hoc disallowance under section 14A where no borrowing of interest-bearing funds was shown and no actual expenditure was proved to have been incurred to earn the income. The Tribunal also noted that Rule 8D could not be applied to assessment year 2003-04. On that basis, the estimated expenditure disallowance was held unsustainable and deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2016 17:14:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=440598" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 1466 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186202</link>
      <description>Exempt interest accrued on earlier investment in RBI tax free relief bonds did not justify an ad hoc disallowance under section 14A where no borrowing of interest-bearing funds was shown and no actual expenditure was proved to have been incurred to earn the income. The Tribunal also noted that Rule 8D could not be applied to assessment year 2003-04. On that basis, the estimated expenditure disallowance was held unsustainable and deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186202</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>