<?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 (10) TMI 860 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760261</link>
    <description>Amounts paid to collaborators under a joint venture arrangement were analysed against the agreement and business model, and were treated as a share of business surplus rather than consideration for a separate service or lease. On that basis, the payment was regarded as revenue sharing within a composite venture, so no tax was deductible at source on the amount. Because the payment was not liable to TDS, disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Oct 2024 09:14:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=773951" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (10) TMI 860 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760261</link>
      <description>Amounts paid to collaborators under a joint venture arrangement were analysed against the agreement and business model, and were treated as a share of business surplus rather than consideration for a separate service or lease. On that basis, the payment was regarded as revenue sharing within a composite venture, so no tax was deductible at source on the amount. Because the payment was not liable to TDS, disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760261</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>