<?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>2016 (3) TMI 214 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325030</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that payments made by an Indian company engaged in DTH services to TV channels constituted royalty under Explanation 2(v) of Section 9(1)(vi), requiring tax deduction at source under Section 194J, not Section 194C. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s direction to verify tax payments by deductees and grant relief, in line with the Supreme Court&#039;s precedent. Both the assessee and Revenue appeals were dismissed, affirming the tax treatment and legitimacy of the CIT(A)&#039;s directive.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2016 11:03:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=419324" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 214 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325030</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that payments made by an Indian company engaged in DTH services to TV channels constituted royalty under Explanation 2(v) of Section 9(1)(vi), requiring tax deduction at source under Section 194J, not Section 194C. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s direction to verify tax payments by deductees and grant relief, in line with the Supreme Court&#039;s precedent. Both the assessee and Revenue appeals were dismissed, affirming the tax treatment and legitimacy of the CIT(A)&#039;s directive.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325030</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>