https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260256 The Karnataka High Court upheld the ITAT's decision in a case involving the interpretation of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2009-10. The court determined that the non-filing of Form No.15-I/J by sub-contractors did not trigger Section 40(a)(ia) if they had complied with Section 194C(3) by filing necessary declaration forms. The High Court held that the filing of Form No.15I/J was directory, not mandatory, and since the conditions of Section 194C(3) were met, the liability to deduct tax at source ceased. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed as no substantial questions of law were found to arise. en-us Mon, 13 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Mar 2016 16:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260256 The Karnataka High Court upheld the ITAT's decision in a case involving the interpretation of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2009-10. The court determined that the non-filing of Form No.15-I/J by sub-contractors did not trigger Section 40(a)(ia) if they had complied with Section 194C(3) by filing necessary declaration forms. The High Court held that the filing of Form No.15I/J was directory, not mandatory, and since the conditions of Section 194C(3) were met, the liability to deduct tax at source ceased. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed as no substantial questions of law were found to arise. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 13 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260256