<?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>2015 (11) TMI 1611 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188611</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the Tax Case Appeal, upholding the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Chennai. The Court found that the loans received by the holding company from its subsidiary companies did not meet the criteria for deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. The Court emphasized that the appellant acted as an intermediary without accruing any beneficial interest from the transactions between the subsidiaries. The appeal was dismissed due to the Revenue&#039;s failure to demonstrate sufficient cause for interference with the Tribunal&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2016 10:15:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=451023" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 1611 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188611</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the Tax Case Appeal, upholding the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Chennai. The Court found that the loans received by the holding company from its subsidiary companies did not meet the criteria for deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. The Court emphasized that the appellant acted as an intermediary without accruing any beneficial interest from the transactions between the subsidiaries. The appeal was dismissed due to the Revenue&#039;s failure to demonstrate sufficient cause for interference with the Tribunal&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188611</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>