<?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 (8) TMI 1474 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285102</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that the appellant could not be deemed as &#039;assessee in default&#039; and no interest under Section 201(1A) could be imposed as the deductee had no tax liability. The tribunal emphasized that interest is compensatory and can only be charged when there is an actual tax liability, which was absent in this case. Therefore, the appeal was successful, and the decision was rendered on 03.08.2016.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Dec 2019 17:46:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=598537" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1474 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285102</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that the appellant could not be deemed as &#039;assessee in default&#039; and no interest under Section 201(1A) could be imposed as the deductee had no tax liability. The tribunal emphasized that interest is compensatory and can only be charged when there is an actual tax liability, which was absent in this case. Therefore, the appeal was successful, and the decision was rendered on 03.08.2016.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285102</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>