<?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>2026 (2) TMI 217 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786022</link>
    <description>Management fees paid to ATS were scrutinised as excessive and unreasonable, leading the AO to disallow the expense and add the amount to the assessee&#039;s income. The Delhi HC held that the assessee had discharged the onus to justify the payment, and the SC found no ground to interfere with that view. The special leave petition was dismissed on delay as well as on merits, leaving the HC&#039;s conclusion undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2026 08:24:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=884054" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 217 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786022</link>
      <description>Management fees paid to ATS were scrutinised as excessive and unreasonable, leading the AO to disallow the expense and add the amount to the assessee&#039;s income. The Delhi HC held that the assessee had discharged the onus to justify the payment, and the SC found no ground to interfere with that view. The special leave petition was dismissed on delay as well as on merits, leaving the HC&#039;s conclusion undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786022</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>