<?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>2018 (2) TMI 1588 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356167</link>
    <description>The ITAT dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal and allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, confirming that investments were for business purposes and no interest could be disallowed under Section 36(1)(iii). The ITAT set aside the partial disallowance under Section 14A, concluding that the disallowance under Rule 8D(ii) was not warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2018 15:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=510486" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1588 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356167</link>
      <description>The ITAT dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal and allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, confirming that investments were for business purposes and no interest could be disallowed under Section 36(1)(iii). The ITAT set aside the partial disallowance under Section 14A, concluding that the disallowance under Rule 8D(ii) was not warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356167</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>