<?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>2013 (3) TMI 853 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294069</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dealt with whether a disallowance under section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 could be restored after the CIT(A) deleted it for assessment year 2009-10. It noted that the same issue had already been considered in the Revenue&#039;s appeal for the immediately preceding year, where the disallowance had been held not to be sustainable. Following that earlier decision, the Tribunal declined to restore the disallowance and upheld the relief granted to the assessee, leaving the issue against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:09:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=639222" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (3) TMI 853 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294069</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dealt with whether a disallowance under section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 could be restored after the CIT(A) deleted it for assessment year 2009-10. It noted that the same issue had already been considered in the Revenue&#039;s appeal for the immediately preceding year, where the disallowance had been held not to be sustainable. Following that earlier decision, the Tribunal declined to restore the disallowance and upheld the relief granted to the assessee, leaving the issue against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294069</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>