<?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>2020 (2) TMI 256 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391812</link>
    <description>Interest on compensation for compulsory acquisition of agricultural land was discussed with reference to the distinction between interest under sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the post-amendment position under section 56(2)(viii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961; tax treatment depends on the character of the amount, and the matter was remitted for verification of that classification. Unexplained cash deposits were treated as taxable because the assessee did not satisfactorily explain the source and the additional evidence was rejected for non-compliance with Rule 46A. TDS credit was also made subject to verification by the Assessing Officer and allowance only if admissible in law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Feb 2020 11:17:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=603129" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 256 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391812</link>
      <description>Interest on compensation for compulsory acquisition of agricultural land was discussed with reference to the distinction between interest under sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the post-amendment position under section 56(2)(viii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961; tax treatment depends on the character of the amount, and the matter was remitted for verification of that classification. Unexplained cash deposits were treated as taxable because the assessee did not satisfactorily explain the source and the additional evidence was rejected for non-compliance with Rule 46A. TDS credit was also made subject to verification by the Assessing Officer and allowance only if admissible in law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391812</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>