<?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 515 - ITAT, DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217577</link>
    <description>The amendment to section 40(a)(ia) by the Finance Act, 2010 was treated as retrospective, remedial and curative in nature. Where tax was deducted at source and deposited on or before the due date for filing the return under section 139(1), the disallowance for non-compliance could not be sustained. On that basis, the expenditure remained allowable and the disallowance was deleted in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190952" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 515 - ITAT, DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217577</link>
      <description>The amendment to section 40(a)(ia) by the Finance Act, 2010 was treated as retrospective, remedial and curative in nature. Where tax was deducted at source and deposited on or before the due date for filing the return under section 139(1), the disallowance for non-compliance could not be sustained. On that basis, the expenditure remained allowable and the disallowance was deleted in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217577</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>