<?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>2010 (2) TMI 17 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35363</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing the debatable nature of the issue regarding the allowability of interest payable on late deposit of provident fund under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal, as the deletion of the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 43-B of the Income Tax Act was deemed irrelevant based on the findings related to the first issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2016 12:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73951" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 17 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35363</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing the debatable nature of the issue regarding the allowability of interest payable on late deposit of provident fund under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal, as the deletion of the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 43-B of the Income Tax Act was deemed irrelevant based on the findings related to the first issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35363</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>