<?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>2023 (6) TMI 617 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439043</link>
    <description>The delay in filing the appeal was condoned as the respondent did not oppose the application. The main issue was whether disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act could exceed the amount of exempted dividend earned by the assessee. The court held that disallowance cannot exceed the expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to the tax-exempt income. As the respondent had already made a disallowance exceeding the exempt dividend income, no substantial question of law arose, and the appeal was closed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2023 10:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=716593" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (6) TMI 617 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439043</link>
      <description>The delay in filing the appeal was condoned as the respondent did not oppose the application. The main issue was whether disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act could exceed the amount of exempted dividend earned by the assessee. The court held that disallowance cannot exceed the expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to the tax-exempt income. As the respondent had already made a disallowance exceeding the exempt dividend income, no substantial question of law arose, and the appeal was closed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439043</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>