<?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 (6) TMI 38 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248134</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, finding that the transactions were on a principal-to-principal basis, thereby negating the applicability of Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act. It also held that the provisions of Section 194H were not applicable as the assessee was not acting as a commission agent. The Tribunal allowed the appeals for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10, vacating the demands raised by the Assessing Officer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2014 10:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=356791" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 38 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248134</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, finding that the transactions were on a principal-to-principal basis, thereby negating the applicability of Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act. It also held that the provisions of Section 194H were not applicable as the assessee was not acting as a commission agent. The Tribunal allowed the appeals for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10, vacating the demands raised by the Assessing Officer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248134</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>