<?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 (4) TMI 232 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406116</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the appeals challenging the common order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for assessment years 2008-2009 to 2011-2012. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that there was no material to support adding notional interest to taxable income. The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, finding that the Tribunal correctly exercised its powers under Section 254(2) by recalling the order regarding the notional interest issue. The High Court declined to consider the first question of law raised by the revenue but agreed to address the second question along with another appeal related to bank deposits in the future.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Apr 2021 08:53:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=641013" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (4) TMI 232 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406116</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the appeals challenging the common order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for assessment years 2008-2009 to 2011-2012. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that there was no material to support adding notional interest to taxable income. The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, finding that the Tribunal correctly exercised its powers under Section 254(2) by recalling the order regarding the notional interest issue. The High Court declined to consider the first question of law raised by the revenue but agreed to address the second question along with another appeal related to bank deposits in the future.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406116</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>