<?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>2012 (10) TMI 287 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217341</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal concluded that the contract for the purchase of printed material was classified as a contract for sale, not for work and labour. As a result, the provisions of section 194C regarding tax deduction at source were deemed inapplicable, and the assessee was not liable for interest under section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act. The appeals filed by the assessee were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2012 10:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190717" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 287 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217341</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal concluded that the contract for the purchase of printed material was classified as a contract for sale, not for work and labour. As a result, the provisions of section 194C regarding tax deduction at source were deemed inapplicable, and the assessee was not liable for interest under section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act. The appeals filed by the assessee were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217341</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>