<?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>2020 (10) TMI 1079 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400105</link>
    <description>Contribution to a group gratuity arrangement was treated as deductible only where it answered the statutory character of allowable gratuity expenditure; on the facts accepted, the disallowance was deleted. The amendment introducing the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was held prospective, so the assessee could not limit the disallowance for non-deduction of tax at source to 30% for the relevant year, and that disallowance was upheld. The result was partial relief to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=626325" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 1079 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400105</link>
      <description>Contribution to a group gratuity arrangement was treated as deductible only where it answered the statutory character of allowable gratuity expenditure; on the facts accepted, the disallowance was deleted. The amendment introducing the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was held prospective, so the assessee could not limit the disallowance for non-deduction of tax at source to 30% for the relevant year, and that disallowance was upheld. The result was partial relief to the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400105</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>