<?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>2022 (1) TMI 409 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416944</link>
    <description>The appeal for AY 2011-12 was allowed as the order under Sections 201(1)/201(1A) was quashed due to being beyond the permissible period. The Tribunal determined that CAM charges should be subject to tax deduction under Section 194C, not Section 194-I. The appeal for AY 2012-13 was partly allowed on similar grounds. The decision was rendered on 31st December 2021.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2022 12:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=666863" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 409 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416944</link>
      <description>The appeal for AY 2011-12 was allowed as the order under Sections 201(1)/201(1A) was quashed due to being beyond the permissible period. The Tribunal determined that CAM charges should be subject to tax deduction under Section 194C, not Section 194-I. The appeal for AY 2012-13 was partly allowed on similar grounds. The decision was rendered on 31st December 2021.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416944</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>