<?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>2024 (12) TMI 1064 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763484</link>
    <description>Section 14A disallowance was held unsustainable on dividend from shares and securities held as stock-in-trade because the exempt income was incidental to business holdings and expenditure had to be apportioned on the facts. Amortisation of premium on held-to-maturity securities was allowed because spreading the premium over the holding period reflected the true income position. Loss on transfer of securities from available for sale or held for trading to held to maturity was treated as a deductible business loss, while contribution to the employees&#039; pension fund was allowed as business expenditure. Depreciation on goodwill arising from amalgamation required no interference, and no substantial question of law arose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Dec 2024 09:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=783728" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 1064 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763484</link>
      <description>Section 14A disallowance was held unsustainable on dividend from shares and securities held as stock-in-trade because the exempt income was incidental to business holdings and expenditure had to be apportioned on the facts. Amortisation of premium on held-to-maturity securities was allowed because spreading the premium over the holding period reflected the true income position. Loss on transfer of securities from available for sale or held for trading to held to maturity was treated as a deductible business loss, while contribution to the employees&#039; pension fund was allowed as business expenditure. Depreciation on goodwill arising from amalgamation required no interference, and no substantial question of law arose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763484</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>