https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213884 The High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision that the contract between the parties was divisible into separate agreements for supply, erection, and civil works, not a composite contract. Consequently, the assessee was not obligated to deduct tax under Section 194C on the supply portion, and interest under Section 201(1A) was not leviable. The Court held that the contracts were treated separately based on tender documents and agreements. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, and the substantial questions of law favored the assessee. en-us Thu, 15 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 31 Oct 2013 08:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213884 The High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision that the contract between the parties was divisible into separate agreements for supply, erection, and civil works, not a composite contract. Consequently, the assessee was not obligated to deduct tax under Section 194C on the supply portion, and interest under Section 201(1A) was not leviable. The Court held that the contracts were treated separately based on tender documents and agreements. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, and the substantial questions of law favored the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 15 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213884