<?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 (4) TMI 1373 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359262</link>
    <description>The appellant&#039;s claim for a deduction under Section 80-O of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was disallowed as the services provided did not qualify as technical services. The appellant failed to provide adequate evidence to support the claim, leading to the dismissal of the appeal by the High Court. The court upheld the decision that there was no basis for granting the deduction, affirming that the services did not meet the criteria outlined in Section 80-O. The appeal was ultimately dismissed, with no costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2018 12:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518121" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1373 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359262</link>
      <description>The appellant&#039;s claim for a deduction under Section 80-O of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was disallowed as the services provided did not qualify as technical services. The appellant failed to provide adequate evidence to support the claim, leading to the dismissal of the appeal by the High Court. The court upheld the decision that there was no basis for granting the deduction, affirming that the services did not meet the criteria outlined in Section 80-O. The appeal was ultimately dismissed, with no costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359262</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>