<?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>2014 (1) TMI 850 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242634</link>
    <description>Consideration paid for live telecast of horse races was treated as a reciprocal sharing of income, not payment for any grant of rights, licence, or use of copyright. A live event did not amount to a protected work, so the payment fell outside the definition of royalty under section 9(1)(vi). As a result, no tax deduction obligation arose under section 194J, and the consequential disallowance under section 40a(ia) was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 Jan 2014 10:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=343064" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 850 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242634</link>
      <description>Consideration paid for live telecast of horse races was treated as a reciprocal sharing of income, not payment for any grant of rights, licence, or use of copyright. A live event did not amount to a protected work, so the payment fell outside the definition of royalty under section 9(1)(vi). As a result, no tax deduction obligation arose under section 194J, and the consequential disallowance under section 40a(ia) was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242634</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>