<?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>2021 (2) TMI 1040 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404548</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower authorities&#039; decisions on the interpretation of Section 194H of the Income Tax Act and the determination of consultancy charges as revenue expenditure. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the tax deduction at source provisions were not applicable and that the consultancy charges qualified as revenue expenditure, leading to no change in the lower rulings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2021 09:11:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=637395" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (2) TMI 1040 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404548</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower authorities&#039; decisions on the interpretation of Section 194H of the Income Tax Act and the determination of consultancy charges as revenue expenditure. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the tax deduction at source provisions were not applicable and that the consultancy charges qualified as revenue expenditure, leading to no change in the lower rulings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404548</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>