<?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>2019 (12) TMI 1561 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299206</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the Assessee&#039;s appeal, ruling that the loan received could not be deemed as dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as there was no shareholding connection between the parties. The Tribunal relied on legal precedents and case laws to support its decision, ultimately deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2021 20:58:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=663093" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (12) TMI 1561 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299206</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the Assessee&#039;s appeal, ruling that the loan received could not be deemed as dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as there was no shareholding connection between the parties. The Tribunal relied on legal precedents and case laws to support its decision, ultimately deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299206</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>