<?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 (8) TMI 511 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410933</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee regarding disallowances under Section 40(a)(ia) for failure to deduct TDS under Sections 194C and 194H. However, the Court upheld the disallowance of commission or brokerage payments and the addition under Section 69C for undisclosed income. The appeal was partially allowed based on these findings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2021 08:51:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=652569" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (8) TMI 511 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410933</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee regarding disallowances under Section 40(a)(ia) for failure to deduct TDS under Sections 194C and 194H. However, the Court upheld the disallowance of commission or brokerage payments and the addition under Section 69C for undisclosed income. The appeal was partially allowed based on these findings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410933</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>