<?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 (6) TMI 488 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344217</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that cash payments to WBSEDCL were exempt under Rule 6DD(b) of the IT Rules, and disallowance under Section 40A(3) was not justified. The Tribunal emphasized the genuineness of transactions and exemptions for payments to government entities, holding that Section 40A(3) did not apply in this case. The AO was directed to delete the disallowance, supporting the assessee&#039;s position.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=471631" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 488 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344217</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that cash payments to WBSEDCL were exempt under Rule 6DD(b) of the IT Rules, and disallowance under Section 40A(3) was not justified. The Tribunal emphasized the genuineness of transactions and exemptions for payments to government entities, holding that Section 40A(3) did not apply in this case. The AO was directed to delete the disallowance, supporting the assessee&#039;s position.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344217</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>