<?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>1983 (4) TMI 90 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61295</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal by upholding the disallowance of interest paid to HUF and the application of Section 40(b) regarding payments to partners. However, it deleted the disallowance of miscellaneous expenses and the ad hoc addition in the trading account. The Tribunal also annulled the inclusion of income from two other firms in the assessee&#039;s income due to a lack of substantial proof and violation of principles of natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 30 Apr 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 11:07:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=99742" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (4) TMI 90 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61295</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal by upholding the disallowance of interest paid to HUF and the application of Section 40(b) regarding payments to partners. However, it deleted the disallowance of miscellaneous expenses and the ad hoc addition in the trading account. The Tribunal also annulled the inclusion of income from two other firms in the assessee&#039;s income due to a lack of substantial proof and violation of principles of natural justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 30 Apr 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61295</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>