https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220488 The Tribunal held that Section 194C(1) of the Income Tax Act did not apply as it was introduced after the relevant assessment year. Additionally, Section 194C(2) was deemed inapplicable as there was no contractor-subcontractor relationship between the parties. The interpretation of the term "work" under Explanation III of Section 194C was also considered, with the Tribunal concluding that hiring an agency for transportation did not establish such a relationship. Consequently, the disallowance of expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia) was not warranted. The Tribunal's decision was upheld, and the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed by the High Court. en-us Tue, 09 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jan 2013 07:38:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220488 The Tribunal held that Section 194C(1) of the Income Tax Act did not apply as it was introduced after the relevant assessment year. Additionally, Section 194C(2) was deemed inapplicable as there was no contractor-subcontractor relationship between the parties. The interpretation of the term "work" under Explanation III of Section 194C was also considered, with the Tribunal concluding that hiring an agency for transportation did not establish such a relationship. Consequently, the disallowance of expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia) was not warranted. The Tribunal's decision was upheld, and the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed by the High Court. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220488