<?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>2002 (11) TMI 75 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12119</link>
    <description>HC upheld the Tribunal&#039;s finding that the revenue failed to prove any specific interest-bearing borrowed funds diverted by the assessee to a sister concern. The Tribunal&#039;s conclusions were supported by the evidence on record, and the HC found no question of law, substantial or otherwise, arising from those orders. The challenge was dismissed for lack of probative material showing the Tribunal&#039;s findings were contrary to or unsupported by evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2025 10:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=51131" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (11) TMI 75 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12119</link>
      <description>HC upheld the Tribunal&#039;s finding that the revenue failed to prove any specific interest-bearing borrowed funds diverted by the assessee to a sister concern. The Tribunal&#039;s conclusions were supported by the evidence on record, and the HC found no question of law, substantial or otherwise, arising from those orders. The challenge was dismissed for lack of probative material showing the Tribunal&#039;s findings were contrary to or unsupported by evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12119</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>