https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372296 A payment to a non-resident attracted the obligation to deduct tax at source under section 195, but no tax was deducted or remitted. The expenditure was claimed for the first time as work-in-progress in the year under appeal, and the assessment record did not show that the Assessing Officer examined the resulting disallowance under section 40(a)(i). On that basis, the assessment order was treated as suffering from non-examination of a material issue causing prejudice to the Revenue, so the precondition for revision under section 263 was satisfied and the disallowance was upheld. en-us Wed, 12 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Dec 2018 08:17:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372296 A payment to a non-resident attracted the obligation to deduct tax at source under section 195, but no tax was deducted or remitted. The expenditure was claimed for the first time as work-in-progress in the year under appeal, and the assessment record did not show that the Assessing Officer examined the resulting disallowance under section 40(a)(i). On that basis, the assessment order was treated as suffering from non-examination of a material issue causing prejudice to the Revenue, so the precondition for revision under section 263 was satisfied and the disallowance was upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 12 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372296