<?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 (12) TMI 240 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335595</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, ruling that the payment for acquiring sub-lease rights was not subject to TDS under Section 194-I. However, the payment for sharing infrastructure facilities was deemed to fall under Section 194-C. The issue of interest under Section 201(1A) was remanded to the AO for further verification regarding the delay attributed to the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2016 13:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=450605" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 240 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335595</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, ruling that the payment for acquiring sub-lease rights was not subject to TDS under Section 194-I. However, the payment for sharing infrastructure facilities was deemed to fall under Section 194-C. The issue of interest under Section 201(1A) was remanded to the AO for further verification regarding the delay attributed to the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335595</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>