https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400646 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, directing the AO to delete the addition of Rs. 6.8 crores. It was determined that Section 194C was not applicable to the payment made to BCCL, as the relationship was on a principal-to-principal basis. Therefore, the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was deemed unjustified. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2016 and a Karnataka High Court ruling supporting the assessee's position. en-us Wed, 29 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Nov 2020 12:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400646 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, directing the AO to delete the addition of Rs. 6.8 crores. It was determined that Section 194C was not applicable to the payment made to BCCL, as the relationship was on a principal-to-principal basis. Therefore, the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was deemed unjustified. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2016 and a Karnataka High Court ruling supporting the assessee's position. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 29 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400646