https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325835 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the deletion of the addition under Section 40(a)(ia) as the amount was paid and not payable at the end of the year. Additionally, it was found that the appellant did not have contractual obligations with truck owners that would constitute a subcontract under Section 194C(2), leading to the inapplicability of TDS deduction. The decision was supported by judicial precedents and the absence of evidence of formal contracts with truck owners. en-us Thu, 25 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Mar 2016 10:11:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325835 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the deletion of the addition under Section 40(a)(ia) as the amount was paid and not payable at the end of the year. Additionally, it was found that the appellant did not have contractual obligations with truck owners that would constitute a subcontract under Section 194C(2), leading to the inapplicability of TDS deduction. The decision was supported by judicial precedents and the absence of evidence of formal contracts with truck owners. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 25 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325835