<?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 (3) TMI 736 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357033</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, setting aside the revision order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263. It held that the incentives provided to retail dealers were not commissions or brokerage under Section 194H, therefore not subject to TDS deduction. The original assessment order was upheld as the Assessing Officer had conducted a proper inquiry and taken a plausible view, rendering the revision order unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2018 08:37:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512967" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 736 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357033</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, setting aside the revision order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263. It held that the incentives provided to retail dealers were not commissions or brokerage under Section 194H, therefore not subject to TDS deduction. The original assessment order was upheld as the Assessing Officer had conducted a proper inquiry and taken a plausible view, rendering the revision order unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357033</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>