<?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>2000 (3) TMI 1039 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127862</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the assessee was not liable to deduct tax under section 194-I as the payments were not considered as rent but part of a conducting arrangement. Consequently, the assessee was not deemed an assessee in default and was not required to pay interest under section 201(1A). The appeals were allowed in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2013 09:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164737" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (3) TMI 1039 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127862</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the assessee was not liable to deduct tax under section 194-I as the payments were not considered as rent but part of a conducting arrangement. Consequently, the assessee was not deemed an assessee in default and was not required to pay interest under section 201(1A). The appeals were allowed in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127862</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>