<?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 939 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411361</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, directing verification of tax payment by the Principal Contractor on equipment hire charges. Emphasizing TDS compliance, it referred to legal precedent and sent the matter back for assessment. The decision highlighted the importance of tax deduction at source under section 40(a)(ia) while considering the specific circumstances and liability of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2021 08:14:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=653750" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (8) TMI 939 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411361</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, directing verification of tax payment by the Principal Contractor on equipment hire charges. Emphasizing TDS compliance, it referred to legal precedent and sent the matter back for assessment. The decision highlighted the importance of tax deduction at source under section 40(a)(ia) while considering the specific circumstances and liability of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411361</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>