<?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 (9) TMI 1079 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443457</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the deletion of the addition of capital loss by the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2015-16. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed as the Court approved the Scheme of Arrangement with the correct effective date of 01.04.2015, not 01.04.2014 as assumed by the Assessing Officer. The ownership change due to the amalgamation was correctly appreciated, leading to the decision in favor of the assessee company and emphasizing the importance of accurate interpretation of legal documents in tax assessments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Sep 2023 08:40:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=727040" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (9) TMI 1079 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443457</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the deletion of the addition of capital loss by the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2015-16. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed as the Court approved the Scheme of Arrangement with the correct effective date of 01.04.2015, not 01.04.2014 as assumed by the Assessing Officer. The ownership change due to the amalgamation was correctly appreciated, leading to the decision in favor of the assessee company and emphasizing the importance of accurate interpretation of legal documents in tax assessments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443457</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>