<?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>2013 (4) TMI 339 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=222143</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the taxpayer, allowing the deduction of tax without considering surcharge under section 195 of the Income-tax Act. The decision was based on the DTAA between India and France, which did not mention surcharge for tax deduction purposes, giving precedence to the DTAA over the Indian Income-tax Act. The Tribunal confirmed the lower authority&#039;s decision to delete the tax component equivalent to surcharge and education cess, stating that the taxpayer could benefit from the DTAA provision for tax deduction purposes. The revenue&#039;s appeals and the taxpayer&#039;s cross objections were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 19:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=195492" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (4) TMI 339 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=222143</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the taxpayer, allowing the deduction of tax without considering surcharge under section 195 of the Income-tax Act. The decision was based on the DTAA between India and France, which did not mention surcharge for tax deduction purposes, giving precedence to the DTAA over the Indian Income-tax Act. The Tribunal confirmed the lower authority&#039;s decision to delete the tax component equivalent to surcharge and education cess, stating that the taxpayer could benefit from the DTAA provision for tax deduction purposes. The revenue&#039;s appeals and the taxpayer&#039;s cross objections were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=222143</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>