<?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 (9) TMI 1229 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367493</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals partly, directing the CIT(A) to verify compliance with TDS provisions for advertisement expenses reimbursed to RDs and salary payments. The Tribunal addressed interest levied for non-deduction of tax under various sections in favor of the assessee due to procedural errors by the Assessing Officer. The penalty under section 271C was also partially allowed. The Tribunal emphasized proper verification by the Assessing Officer and compliance with natural justice principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2018 10:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=535256" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 1229 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367493</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals partly, directing the CIT(A) to verify compliance with TDS provisions for advertisement expenses reimbursed to RDs and salary payments. The Tribunal addressed interest levied for non-deduction of tax under various sections in favor of the assessee due to procedural errors by the Assessing Officer. The penalty under section 271C was also partially allowed. The Tribunal emphasized proper verification by the Assessing Officer and compliance with natural justice principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367493</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>