<?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>2009 (2) TMI 7 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32434</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision in favor of the assessee, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding the disallowance of interest claimed as a deduction under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act for share trading business. The courts found that the assessee was actively trading in shares and had not used borrowed funds for share investments, as alleged by the Revenue. As a result, the appeal was dismissed, with the Court determining that no substantial question of law arose for consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71074" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 7 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32434</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision in favor of the assessee, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding the disallowance of interest claimed as a deduction under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act for share trading business. The courts found that the assessee was actively trading in shares and had not used borrowed funds for share investments, as alleged by the Revenue. As a result, the appeal was dismissed, with the Court determining that no substantial question of law arose for consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32434</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>