<?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 (7) TMI 2038 - ITAT KOLKATA </title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282993</link>
    <description>Cash payments for liquor purchases made to a State Government-appointed agent were treated as payments to the Government for the purposes of the excise supply arrangement, so the exception in Rule 6DD(b) applied. On that footing, the disallowance under section 40A(3) for cash purchases of liquor was not sustainable, and the addition was deleted in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Sep 2019 14:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=585788" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 2038 - ITAT KOLKATA </title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282993</link>
      <description>Cash payments for liquor purchases made to a State Government-appointed agent were treated as payments to the Government for the purposes of the excise supply arrangement, so the exception in Rule 6DD(b) applied. On that footing, the disallowance under section 40A(3) for cash purchases of liquor was not sustainable, and the addition was deleted in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282993</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>