<?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 (8) TMI 1498 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288683</link>
    <description>The court held in favor of the assessee, ruling that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act is clarificatory and retrospective. It was determined that disallowance under this section is not justifiable when the recipient has already paid the tax. The judgment is contingent upon the outcome of a related case pending before the Supreme Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2021 14:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=615735" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 1498 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288683</link>
      <description>The court held in favor of the assessee, ruling that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act is clarificatory and retrospective. It was determined that disallowance under this section is not justifiable when the recipient has already paid the tax. The judgment is contingent upon the outcome of a related case pending before the Supreme Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288683</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>