1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
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 The ITAT allowed the appeal, holding that the AO's disallowance could not be sustained to the extent premised on an incorrect charging provision (s.194A) when the issue before authorities concerned potential applicability of s.194C and disallowance under s.40(a)(ia). The Tribunal found the CIT(A) lacked jurisdiction under s.251(1)(a) to alter the substantive head of charge without putting the assessee on notice; a deeming provision creating a legal fiction under s.40(a)(ia) must be applied only for its specific statutory purpose and cannot be extended by recharacterisation. Consequently the impugned disallowance was quashed to the extent founded on the erroneous invocation of s.194A.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
