<?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 (3) TMI 341 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244886</link>
    <description>The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision that Molasses qualifies as scrap under section 206C, necessitating tax collection at source. However, Bagasse was deemed not to fall under the definition of scrap due to its direct usability, exempting it from tax collection at source. The Revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s order without alteration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:28:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348259" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 341 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244886</link>
      <description>The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision that Molasses qualifies as scrap under section 206C, necessitating tax collection at source. However, Bagasse was deemed not to fall under the definition of scrap due to its direct usability, exempting it from tax collection at source. The Revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s order without alteration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244886</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>