<?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 (12) TMI 1419 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353150</link>
    <description>The appeal challenging the order under the Income Tax Act regarding the addition and interest was dismissed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that there was no evidence of a contract between the assessee and a specified person for the payment of labour charges, as required by section 194C of the Act. As the identity of the payee was not established, the appeal lacked any substantial question of law and was therefore dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Dec 2017 08:05:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501496" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 1419 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353150</link>
      <description>The appeal challenging the order under the Income Tax Act regarding the addition and interest was dismissed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that there was no evidence of a contract between the assessee and a specified person for the payment of labour charges, as required by section 194C of the Act. As the identity of the payee was not established, the appeal lacked any substantial question of law and was therefore dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353150</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>