<?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 861 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786713</link>
    <description>Commission paid to secure a new tenant was held to be incurred wholly and exclusively for the letting business and deductible; deduction allowed. Interest on loans used for group investments was held to satisfy nexus and commercial expediency based on prior final findings and contemporaneous documents, so interest disallowance was deleted. Housekeeping and security charges contractually borne by lessor and supported by receipts were accepted as business expenditure and allowed. Claimed long term capital loss lacked enforceable transfer documentation and was rescinded by an MOU, so the loss and its carry forward were disallowed. Overall, revenue appeals partly failed and the capital loss claim was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2026 08:11:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=886886" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 861 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786713</link>
      <description>Commission paid to secure a new tenant was held to be incurred wholly and exclusively for the letting business and deductible; deduction allowed. Interest on loans used for group investments was held to satisfy nexus and commercial expediency based on prior final findings and contemporaneous documents, so interest disallowance was deleted. Housekeeping and security charges contractually borne by lessor and supported by receipts were accepted as business expenditure and allowed. Claimed long term capital loss lacked enforceable transfer documentation and was rescinded by an MOU, so the loss and its carry forward were disallowed. Overall, revenue appeals partly failed and the capital loss claim was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786713</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>