<?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>2015 (5) TMI 931 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260057</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal and allowed the assessee&#039;s cross-objection, concluding that the third and fourth categories of doctors should be classified as independent professionals under Section 194J. The Tribunal emphasized the significance of the nature of agreements and consistency in tax treatment, overturning the CIT(A)&#039;s decision for the fifth category of doctors.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2015 17:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=386358" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 931 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260057</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal and allowed the assessee&#039;s cross-objection, concluding that the third and fourth categories of doctors should be classified as independent professionals under Section 194J. The Tribunal emphasized the significance of the nature of agreements and consistency in tax treatment, overturning the CIT(A)&#039;s decision for the fifth category of doctors.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260057</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>