<?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>2017 (11) TMI 269 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350390</link>
    <description>The Court dismissed the appeal regarding the disallowance of remuneration paid to the Executive Director under Section 40A(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ITAT set aside the addition made on reassessment, emphasizing the commercial expediency principle and the need for a balanced evaluation of claims. The Court held that no substantial question of law arose, reaffirming the importance of applying arms-length evaluation in such cases, as guided by judicial precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Nov 2017 12:57:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=494714" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 269 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350390</link>
      <description>The Court dismissed the appeal regarding the disallowance of remuneration paid to the Executive Director under Section 40A(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ITAT set aside the addition made on reassessment, emphasizing the commercial expediency principle and the need for a balanced evaluation of claims. The Court held that no substantial question of law arose, reaffirming the importance of applying arms-length evaluation in such cases, as guided by judicial precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350390</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>