<?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 (11) TMI 574 - ITAT INDORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430150</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal quashed the revision-order passed by the Ld. CIT under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in favor of the assessee. The judgment highlighted discrepancies in the examination of TDS liability on roaming charges under sections 194H and 194J, emphasizing legal precedents that roaming charges do not attract TDS under section 194J. The Tribunal found the revision-order to be erroneous and not meeting the requirements of section 263, leading to its cancellation and ruling in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2022 09:14:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=695620" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (11) TMI 574 - ITAT INDORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430150</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal quashed the revision-order passed by the Ld. CIT under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in favor of the assessee. The judgment highlighted discrepancies in the examination of TDS liability on roaming charges under sections 194H and 194J, emphasizing legal precedents that roaming charges do not attract TDS under section 194J. The Tribunal found the revision-order to be erroneous and not meeting the requirements of section 263, leading to its cancellation and ruling in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430150</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>