<?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>2024 (4) TMI 208 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751027</link>
    <description>External Development Charges were considered in the context of the obligation to withhold tax deducted at source under Section 194-I, including the characterisation of the payment and the effect of an erroneous statutory reference in taxing orders. The Supreme Court noted its earlier orders in related matters and, following those rulings, dismissed the special leave petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 16:55:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=749209" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (4) TMI 208 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751027</link>
      <description>External Development Charges were considered in the context of the obligation to withhold tax deducted at source under Section 194-I, including the characterisation of the payment and the effect of an erroneous statutory reference in taxing orders. The Supreme Court noted its earlier orders in related matters and, following those rulings, dismissed the special leave petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751027</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>