The ITAT allowed the appeal, holding that the AO's disallowance...

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.