<?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>2006 (1) TMI 462 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118511</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed both appeals filed by the assessee, affirming that the payments to concessionaires were commissions, not discounts, and the relationship was principal to agent. Consequently, the assessee was required to deduct tax at source under section 194H and was correctly treated as in default for failing to do so.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Jul 2012 15:54:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155508" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 462 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118511</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed both appeals filed by the assessee, affirming that the payments to concessionaires were commissions, not discounts, and the relationship was principal to agent. Consequently, the assessee was required to deduct tax at source under section 194H and was correctly treated as in default for failing to do so.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118511</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>