<?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>2017 (7) TMI 1338 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284803</link>
    <description>Section 40A(3) applies only where the assessee is shown to have made a cash payment to the relevant payee. On the facts stated, no direct cash payment by the assessee to the land owners was established, and the sale deeds were executed directly between the land owners and the purchasers. The article notes that a co-ordinate bench had reached the same result on identical facts, so the cash payment disallowance was not sustainable and the relief to the assessee was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Dec 2019 10:40:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=596986" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 1338 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284803</link>
      <description>Section 40A(3) applies only where the assessee is shown to have made a cash payment to the relevant payee. On the facts stated, no direct cash payment by the assessee to the land owners was established, and the sale deeds were executed directly between the land owners and the purchasers. The article notes that a co-ordinate bench had reached the same result on identical facts, so the cash payment disallowance was not sustainable and the relief to the assessee was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284803</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>