<?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>2011 (4) TMI 880 - ITAT, Mumbai</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210100</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order and directing deletion of the demand under section 201(1) and interest under section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal held that the assessee, in light of legal uncertainty and interim stays by High Courts, acted in good faith by not deducting tax on perquisites, thus not being deemed an &#039;assessee in default&#039;.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183536" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 880 - ITAT, Mumbai</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210100</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order and directing deletion of the demand under section 201(1) and interest under section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal held that the assessee, in light of legal uncertainty and interim stays by High Courts, acted in good faith by not deducting tax on perquisites, thus not being deemed an &#039;assessee in default&#039;.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210100</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>