<?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>2006 (2) TMI 160 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31380</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that the supply of printed materials constituted a contract for sale, not a works contract. The Court agreed with the Tribunal&#039;s interpretation that tax deduction at source was not required under section 194C of the Income Tax Act for such transactions, based on Circulars issued by the CBDT. The appeals challenging the deletion of demands by the Income-tax Officer and interest were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70027" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 160 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31380</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that the supply of printed materials constituted a contract for sale, not a works contract. The Court agreed with the Tribunal&#039;s interpretation that tax deduction at source was not required under section 194C of the Income Tax Act for such transactions, based on Circulars issued by the CBDT. The appeals challenging the deletion of demands by the Income-tax Officer and interest were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31380</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>