TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of TDS u/s 194C was disallowed for 'Crew Wages Expenses' u/s 40(a)(ia) by the AO, considering the assessee as a sub-contractor required to deduct TDS. The assessee contended being a contractor in a principal-to-principal arrangement for providing crew, not covered under 194C contracts. The ITAT held that for 194C(2) applicability, conditions of the assessee being a contractor, entering into a sub-contract where the sub-contractor carries out part of the contractor's work, and payment for such work, must be satisfied. In this case, the assessee was solely responsible for execution, suggesting no transfer of contractual responsibility to crew as sub-contractors. Absence of such sub-contract rendered 194C and consequently 40(a)(ia) incorrectly invoked. The ITAT allowed the ground, relying on Prashant H. Shah.
TaxTMI 
