<?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>2019 (12) TMI 378 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389495</link>
    <description>The court held that Section 194C was not applicable as the Assessee did not act as a contractor but sold areas to another entity. Consequently, Section 40(a)(ia) did not apply for disallowing expenditure. The court ruled in favor of the Assessee, dismissing the appeal with no order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Dec 2019 14:56:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=596715" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (12) TMI 378 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389495</link>
      <description>The court held that Section 194C was not applicable as the Assessee did not act as a contractor but sold areas to another entity. Consequently, Section 40(a)(ia) did not apply for disallowing expenditure. The court ruled in favor of the Assessee, dismissing the appeal with no order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389495</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>