<?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>2012 (1) TMI 400 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296019</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition under sections 36(1)(va) and 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act for late deposit of employees&#039; PF contribution. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to verify if the payment was made before the due date of filing the return, and if so, the addition should be deleted. The revenue&#039;s appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2021 12:44:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=648279" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (1) TMI 400 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296019</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the addition under sections 36(1)(va) and 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act for late deposit of employees&#039; PF contribution. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to verify if the payment was made before the due date of filing the return, and if so, the addition should be deleted. The revenue&#039;s appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296019</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>