<?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 (11) TMI 216 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252899</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act for payments made by the assessee, requiring tax deduction at source. It found the payments were not pure reimbursements and lacked evidence to support otherwise. The Tribunal dismissed the Miscellaneous Application, stating errors in judgment do not constitute apparent mistakes. The original order was upheld, confirming the tax implications on the payments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2014 22:05:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=368273" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 216 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252899</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act for payments made by the assessee, requiring tax deduction at source. It found the payments were not pure reimbursements and lacked evidence to support otherwise. The Tribunal dismissed the Miscellaneous Application, stating errors in judgment do not constitute apparent mistakes. The original order was upheld, confirming the tax implications on the payments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252899</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>