<?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 (6) TMI 353 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792972</link>
    <description>No disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D was made because no exempt income was earned, and the Finance Act, 2022 amendment was treated as prospective. The write-off of security deposits and waiver of interest receivable were allowed as business loss or revenue expenditure where the losses arose in the course of business. Notional interest on interest-free advances to subsidiaries was deleted because hypothetical income cannot be taxed without a proper statutory basis. The write-off relating to fixed assets was disallowed since the relevant assets remained in an existing block and a separate deduction would create a double deduction. The gratuity-related issue was sent back for factual verification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2026 12:15:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=905787" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 353 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792972</link>
      <description>No disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D was made because no exempt income was earned, and the Finance Act, 2022 amendment was treated as prospective. The write-off of security deposits and waiver of interest receivable were allowed as business loss or revenue expenditure where the losses arose in the course of business. Notional interest on interest-free advances to subsidiaries was deleted because hypothetical income cannot be taxed without a proper statutory basis. The write-off relating to fixed assets was disallowed since the relevant assets remained in an existing block and a separate deduction would create a double deduction. The gratuity-related issue was sent back for factual verification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792972</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>