Agree with others that the best approach would be to have a company (stand) of infantry supporting the efforts of your company/companies (stand/stands) of tanks.
In the post-war European armies it became reasonably common to create combined arms companies by mixing a platoon of infantry into a company of armor, or vice versa. NATO armies would often "exchange" platoons, with an armored company giving up one platoon of tanks to be attached to an infantry company, and getting a platoon of infantry attached in exchange, for example. In Warsaw Pact armies it was more common to have a company in the battalion or regimental structure, which could be parceled out as attachments with no cross-attaching. So a tank company might get a platoon of infantry attached without giving any of its tanks up.
But that was not done in WW2 except in the most unusual cases. Far more often the mechanism by which arms came to be combined was full companies attached to a mission, under the command of a task force (kampfgruppe) commander.
That said, the Germans were the most flexible in terms of kampgruppe construction. Their combat leaders were generally VERY practical, and by mid- to late-war would put together formations from whatever forces were available to them to meet mission requirements. So if anyone would have platoons mixed into combined arms formation it would be the Germans.
An additional consideration worth noting is that contrary to what might be implied in the links above, it was not at all common to have German tanks operating with normal infantry companies.
German tanks were in the panzer divisions, period. There were no tanks assigned to work with infantry divisions. That was the job of the StuGs. Doesn't mean it never happened, but it was exceedingly rare compared to other armies. So if you want infantry to work with your tanks, you really should have panzergrenadier formations (the infantry in the panzer divisions), not landser formations (the infantry in the infantry divisions). Panzergrenadiers had different TOEs than landsers.
In the U.S. Army it was also true that the armored infantry (in the armored divisions) had different TOEs than the Infantry (in the infantry divisions). But most US infantry divisions had tanks in support (GHQ independent tank battalions). In fact if you count the tank destroyers as well, most US infantry divisions in ETO had more armor than German panzer divisions (more transports for the infantry, too). So it is entirely reasonable to have tanks and standard infantry formations working together for the U.S. Army.
All based on readings, and subject to correction.
-Mark
(aka: Mk 1)
