<?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 572 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337492</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision that placement fees paid to cable operators/MSOs are subject to TDS under Section 194C, not under Sections 194J or 194H. The appellant was not considered an assessee in default under Section 201(1)/201(1A) due to no short deduction of tax, leading to the dismissal of Revenue&#039;s appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2017 07:26:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=454829" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 572 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337492</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision that placement fees paid to cable operators/MSOs are subject to TDS under Section 194C, not under Sections 194J or 194H. The appellant was not considered an assessee in default under Section 201(1)/201(1A) due to no short deduction of tax, leading to the dismissal of Revenue&#039;s appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337492</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>