https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238980 Sub-brokerage paid on mutual fund unit transactions was held not liable to disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) because section 194H did not require tax deduction at source on such payments. Mutual fund units were treated as securities, and the statutory definition of "commission or brokerage" excludes transactions in securities. As the payment related to services connected with buying and selling securities and no separate non-securities service was shown, TDS was not attracted. The Revenue's challenge therefore failed, and the assessee's claim on the issue was accepted. en-us Wed, 02 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Nov 2013 18:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238980 Sub-brokerage paid on mutual fund unit transactions was held not liable to disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) because section 194H did not require tax deduction at source on such payments. Mutual fund units were treated as securities, and the statutory definition of "commission or brokerage" excludes transactions in securities. As the payment related to services connected with buying and selling securities and no separate non-securities service was shown, TDS was not attracted. The Revenue's challenge therefore failed, and the assessee's claim on the issue was accepted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 02 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238980