<?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>2014 (6) TMI 980 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189866</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the decision in favor of the assessee, dismissing the appeals by the Revenue. It was held that only the income subject to violation of Section 11(5) and 13(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act should be assessed for tax, not the entire income, based on precedents from the Bombay High Court and Karnataka High Court. The court interpreted the relevant sections to limit the assessment to income directly related to the violation, ensuring consistent application of the law and fair treatment of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2017 10:21:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=456273" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 980 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189866</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the decision in favor of the assessee, dismissing the appeals by the Revenue. It was held that only the income subject to violation of Section 11(5) and 13(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act should be assessed for tax, not the entire income, based on precedents from the Bombay High Court and Karnataka High Court. The court interpreted the relevant sections to limit the assessment to income directly related to the violation, ensuring consistent application of the law and fair treatment of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189866</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>