<?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>2021 (1) TMI 667 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403075</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee, holding that the adjusted amount should be excluded from deemed dividend treatment under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. The addition made by the CIT(A) was deleted based on the specific circumstances of the case, where the advance received was adjusted against dividends in the following year, falling under an exception to Section 2(22)(e).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2021 10:12:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=633352" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (1) TMI 667 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403075</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee, holding that the adjusted amount should be excluded from deemed dividend treatment under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. The addition made by the CIT(A) was deleted based on the specific circumstances of the case, where the advance received was adjusted against dividends in the following year, falling under an exception to Section 2(22)(e).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403075</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>