https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342504 Section 40(a)(ia) was construed with sections 194C and 200 and Rule 30(2) to confirm that TDS compliance is required both on credit and on actual payment. The Court held that the expression "payable" in the disallowance provision does not exclude sums already paid, because a narrow reading would undermine the statutory scheme and the consequences for default. It approved the view that expenditure may be disallowed for failure to deduct or deposit tax at source whether the relevant amount remains outstanding or has been paid, and rejected the contrary Allahabad High Court view. en-us Wed, 03 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Sep 2025 18:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342504 Section 40(a)(ia) was construed with sections 194C and 200 and Rule 30(2) to confirm that TDS compliance is required both on credit and on actual payment. The Court held that the expression "payable" in the disallowance provision does not exclude sums already paid, because a narrow reading would undermine the statutory scheme and the consequences for default. It approved the view that expenditure may be disallowed for failure to deduct or deposit tax at source whether the relevant amount remains outstanding or has been paid, and rejected the contrary Allahabad High Court view. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 03 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342504