<?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 (8) TMI 1136 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365664</link>
    <description>Sufficient interest-free funds meant interest disallowance on advances to a subsidiary could not stand without proof of a direct nexus to borrowed funds, so the deletion was upheld. Section 14A read with Rule 8D was held inapplicable in the assessee&#039;s tonnage tax context, and that deletion was also sustained. Depreciation on the aircraft was treated as covered by the assessee&#039;s own earlier year orders, so the disallowance was not justified. The unpaid ONGC operational charges issue required factual verification and was remanded to the Assessing Officer, while the related additions for previous year adjustment, gratuity provision, and MAT treatment under the tonnage tax regime were upheld in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2022 10:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=531515" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 1136 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365664</link>
      <description>Sufficient interest-free funds meant interest disallowance on advances to a subsidiary could not stand without proof of a direct nexus to borrowed funds, so the deletion was upheld. Section 14A read with Rule 8D was held inapplicable in the assessee&#039;s tonnage tax context, and that deletion was also sustained. Depreciation on the aircraft was treated as covered by the assessee&#039;s own earlier year orders, so the disallowance was not justified. The unpaid ONGC operational charges issue required factual verification and was remanded to the Assessing Officer, while the related additions for previous year adjustment, gratuity provision, and MAT treatment under the tonnage tax regime were upheld in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365664</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>