<?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 (5) TMI 684 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234099</link>
    <description>Freight or truck-hire payments routed through middlemen did not attract tax deduction at source where the payments accrued to the actual truck owners who furnished Forms 15-I and whose vehicles carried the goods. The truck owners were treated as the recipients of the hire payments, and no authority existed to deduct tax at source from those payments. Consequently, disallowance under section 40(ia) lacked a surviving basis, and the revenue appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 May 2013 10:23:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=196512" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (5) TMI 684 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234099</link>
      <description>Freight or truck-hire payments routed through middlemen did not attract tax deduction at source where the payments accrued to the actual truck owners who furnished Forms 15-I and whose vehicles carried the goods. The truck owners were treated as the recipients of the hire payments, and no authority existed to deduct tax at source from those payments. Consequently, disallowance under section 40(ia) lacked a surviving basis, and the revenue appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234099</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>