<?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>2016 (11) TMI 1593 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277673</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the disallowance of expenses on training fees royalty due to non-deduction of TDS under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal considered the payments as reimbursement of actual expenditure not covered by Section 9, and noted the issue arose from a retrospective amendment. The assessee&#039;s non-deduction of tax was deemed justified, and the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, ruling in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2018 05:51:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=547215" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 1593 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277673</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the disallowance of expenses on training fees royalty due to non-deduction of TDS under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal considered the payments as reimbursement of actual expenditure not covered by Section 9, and noted the issue arose from a retrospective amendment. The assessee&#039;s non-deduction of tax was deemed justified, and the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, ruling in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277673</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>