<?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>2000 (12) TMI 70 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14321</link>
    <description>The application for reference was rejected by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal based on its findings that the transactions conducted by the sharebroker were not speculative but fell under an exception in the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal upheld the allowance of set-off for net credit against net debit in the transactions as the Department failed to prove otherwise. The Tribunal emphasized the burden of proof on the Department to establish that the exception did not apply, which they could not do. Therefore, the Tribunal&#039;s decision was in favor of the assessee, and the application for reference was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:12:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=53321" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (12) TMI 70 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14321</link>
      <description>The application for reference was rejected by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal based on its findings that the transactions conducted by the sharebroker were not speculative but fell under an exception in the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal upheld the allowance of set-off for net credit against net debit in the transactions as the Department failed to prove otherwise. The Tribunal emphasized the burden of proof on the Department to establish that the exception did not apply, which they could not do. Therefore, the Tribunal&#039;s decision was in favor of the assessee, and the application for reference was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14321</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>