<?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 (1) TMI 1442 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460903</link>
    <description>Where an assessee company was treated as a routing entity used for accommodation entries, separate commission income could not be assessed in its hands because the fund flow and beneficiary details had already been examined and the commission from the entry operations had been taxed in the hands of the entry operators in their individual capacity. The Tribunal therefore accepted that the company was not the ultimate beneficiary of the commission and upheld deletion of the addition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2025 20:00:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=802746" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 1442 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460903</link>
      <description>Where an assessee company was treated as a routing entity used for accommodation entries, separate commission income could not be assessed in its hands because the fund flow and beneficiary details had already been examined and the commission from the entry operations had been taxed in the hands of the entry operators in their individual capacity. The Tribunal therefore accepted that the company was not the ultimate beneficiary of the commission and upheld deletion of the addition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460903</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>