https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207268 Stay of tax demand was refused where the assessee failed to show a strong prima facie case against disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The claimed reliance on an earlier Jaipur decision did not assist because the Bulk Power Transmission Agreement covered wider transmission-related services, including metering, reading, sealing, resealing and maintenance, making the deduction issue materially different. The assessee's later practice of deducting tax at source and the payee's lower deduction certificate further weakened the request for interim relief. Payment of tax by the payee did not remove the payer's disallowance exposure, and the demand was not stayed. en-us Wed, 05 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207268 Stay of tax demand was refused where the assessee failed to show a strong prima facie case against disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The claimed reliance on an earlier Jaipur decision did not assist because the Bulk Power Transmission Agreement covered wider transmission-related services, including metering, reading, sealing, resealing and maintenance, making the deduction issue materially different. The assessee's later practice of deducting tax at source and the payee's lower deduction certificate further weakened the request for interim relief. Payment of tax by the payee did not remove the payer's disallowance exposure, and the demand was not stayed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 05 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207268