https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181655 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition on account of non-realization of provisions of surcharge, citing consistency with previous years and the contingent nature of the surcharge income. Additionally, the Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s ruling to delete the addition made under section 40(a)(ia) for payment of SLDL and wheeling charges, stating that these charges were not technical services necessitating TDS deduction under section 194J, based on prior tribunal decisions and the nature of the charges as usage fees for infrastructure. en-us Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Aug 2017 12:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181655 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition on account of non-realization of provisions of surcharge, citing consistency with previous years and the contingent nature of the surcharge income. Additionally, the Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s ruling to delete the addition made under section 40(a)(ia) for payment of SLDL and wheeling charges, stating that these charges were not technical services necessitating TDS deduction under section 194J, based on prior tribunal decisions and the nature of the charges as usage fees for infrastructure. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181655