https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261739 The Tribunal determined that the assessees were contractors, not commission agents, based on their responsibilities in providing vehicles. It ruled that no sub-contract existed with vehicle owners, exempting the assessees from TDS provisions under section 194C. Consequently, disallowances under section 40(a)(ia) were deemed inapplicable. The Tribunal upheld the reduced disallowance of vehicle expenses and deletion of the addition for the decrease in net profit. The Revenue's appeals were dismissed, and the assessees' appeals were allowed. en-us Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Jul 2015 08:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261739 The Tribunal determined that the assessees were contractors, not commission agents, based on their responsibilities in providing vehicles. It ruled that no sub-contract existed with vehicle owners, exempting the assessees from TDS provisions under section 194C. Consequently, disallowances under section 40(a)(ia) were deemed inapplicable. The Tribunal upheld the reduced disallowance of vehicle expenses and deletion of the addition for the decrease in net profit. The Revenue's appeals were dismissed, and the assessees' appeals were allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261739