<?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>2009 (3) TMI 648 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121527</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, ruling that the transactions in question were contracts for the sale of goods, not works contracts. Therefore, section 194C was deemed inapplicable, resulting in the assessee not being in default under section 201(1) or liable for interest under section 201(1A).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2012 13:18:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158521" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 648 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121527</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, ruling that the transactions in question were contracts for the sale of goods, not works contracts. Therefore, section 194C was deemed inapplicable, resulting in the assessee not being in default under section 201(1) or liable for interest under section 201(1A).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121527</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>