https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377846 HC held the Tribunal erred in disallowing payments to related directors under s.40A(2) by relying solely on percentage increases rather than whether payments were reasonable and market-commensurate. The Tribunal ignored TDS certificates and other independent evidence showing arm's-length, market-driven remuneration, as well as directors' qualifications, experience and taxation of the receipts at the highest slab. CIT(A)'s findings on these aspects were overlooked. The HC directed that the disallowance be set aside and decided the issue in favor of the assessee. en-us Wed, 12 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Oct 2025 17:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377846 HC held the Tribunal erred in disallowing payments to related directors under s.40A(2) by relying solely on percentage increases rather than whether payments were reasonable and market-commensurate. The Tribunal ignored TDS certificates and other independent evidence showing arm's-length, market-driven remuneration, as well as directors' qualifications, experience and taxation of the receipts at the highest slab. CIT(A)'s findings on these aspects were overlooked. The HC directed that the disallowance be set aside and decided the issue in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 12 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377846