<?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>2004 (9) TMI 651 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178049</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the services provided by the assessee were not covered by Notification G.S.R. 304(E) and that only the portion of income related to mobilization/demobilization work in India was taxable. The Tribunal found that the assessee&#039;s activities did not fall under section 44BB of the Income-tax Act and that only income attributable to operations in India should be taxed. Consequently, the Tribunal canceled the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)&#039;s order and allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2016 16:07:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=414304" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (9) TMI 651 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178049</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the services provided by the assessee were not covered by Notification G.S.R. 304(E) and that only the portion of income related to mobilization/demobilization work in India was taxable. The Tribunal found that the assessee&#039;s activities did not fall under section 44BB of the Income-tax Act and that only income attributable to operations in India should be taxed. Consequently, the Tribunal canceled the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)&#039;s order and allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178049</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>