<?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>2017 (4) TMI 1488 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286786</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessees by concluding that the additions made under Section 2(22)(e) for the Assessment Years 2009-10 to 2011-12 were not sustainable due to the absence of incriminating material found during the search. Additionally, for the Assessment Year 2012-13, the Tribunal deleted the addition as the payment in question was not made with the intention to avoid Dividend Distribution Tax.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 15 Mar 2020 09:36:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=606895" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 1488 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286786</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessees by concluding that the additions made under Section 2(22)(e) for the Assessment Years 2009-10 to 2011-12 were not sustainable due to the absence of incriminating material found during the search. Additionally, for the Assessment Year 2012-13, the Tribunal deleted the addition as the payment in question was not made with the intention to avoid Dividend Distribution Tax.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286786</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>