https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330694 The appeal was filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai, challenging tax liability under section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) for the assessment year 2008-09. The appellant disputed the treatment of international bandwidth and communication charges, arguing against their classification as royalty or fees for technical services. Additionally, the appellant contested the Assessing Officer's time-barred order under Section 201(1) and 201(1A, asserting it was beyond the statutory limit. Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the appellant, holding the orders invalid due to exceeding the prescribed time limit. en-us Fri, 17 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Aug 2016 11:10:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330694 The appeal was filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai, challenging tax liability under section 201(1) and interest under Section 201(1A) for the assessment year 2008-09. The appellant disputed the treatment of international bandwidth and communication charges, arguing against their classification as royalty or fees for technical services. Additionally, the appellant contested the Assessing Officer's time-barred order under Section 201(1) and 201(1A, asserting it was beyond the statutory limit. Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the appellant, holding the orders invalid due to exceeding the prescribed time limit. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330694