<?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>2018 (2) TMI 1636 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356215</link>
    <description>The appeal was partly allowed with the bench upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions on the first two issues regarding the addition of employee contributions to PF &amp;amp; ESI and the applicability of tax provisions. However, the issue of disallowance of consultancy charges was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration due to inadequate opportunity for the Assessing Officer to review additional evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2018 07:12:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=510644" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1636 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356215</link>
      <description>The appeal was partly allowed with the bench upholding the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions on the first two issues regarding the addition of employee contributions to PF &amp;amp; ESI and the applicability of tax provisions. However, the issue of disallowance of consultancy charges was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration due to inadequate opportunity for the Assessing Officer to review additional evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356215</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>