<?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>2017 (1) TMI 569 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337489</link>
    <description>A one-time upfront premium paid for acquisition of long-term leasehold rights was treated as capital in nature and not as rent, because it was not adjustable against periodic lease rent. On that basis, the payment fell outside section 194I, so no tax was deductible at source. As the threshold for TDS liability was not met, the consequential demand and default treatment under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2017 12:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=454815" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 569 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337489</link>
      <description>A one-time upfront premium paid for acquisition of long-term leasehold rights was treated as capital in nature and not as rent, because it was not adjustable against periodic lease rent. On that basis, the payment fell outside section 194I, so no tax was deductible at source. As the threshold for TDS liability was not met, the consequential demand and default treatment under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337489</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>