https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221918 The Tribunal held that the assessee's failure to deduct tax at source on payments to a sub-contractor violated Section 194C and Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act. Despite the assessee's claim of later deduction and deposit, the Tribunal ruled that debiting the account at year-end did not meet the "deduction at source" requirement. The judgment in CIT v. Virgin Creations was deemed inapplicable as tax was not deducted at the time of payment. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was allowed, reinstating the addition of Rs. 57,48,265 under Section 40(a)(ia). en-us Fri, 08 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 May 2022 16:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221918 The Tribunal held that the assessee's failure to deduct tax at source on payments to a sub-contractor violated Section 194C and Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act. Despite the assessee's claim of later deduction and deposit, the Tribunal ruled that debiting the account at year-end did not meet the "deduction at source" requirement. The judgment in CIT v. Virgin Creations was deemed inapplicable as tax was not deducted at the time of payment. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was allowed, reinstating the addition of Rs. 57,48,265 under Section 40(a)(ia). Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 08 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221918