https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294224 Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) could not be sustained on the earlier Merilyn Shipping view alone, as that view had lost efficacy. The provisos to section 40(a)(ia) and the corresponding proviso to section 201(1) were treated as curative and retrospective, so disallowance must be re-examined where the resident payee has filed a return, included the sum in income, and paid the tax due, and the payer is not an assessee in default. As the factual truth of the Form 26A and return-filing claims required verification, the matter was restored for fresh examination by the Assessing Officer. en-us Fri, 21 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Mar 2021 13:53:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294224 Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) could not be sustained on the earlier Merilyn Shipping view alone, as that view had lost efficacy. The provisos to section 40(a)(ia) and the corresponding proviso to section 201(1) were treated as curative and retrospective, so disallowance must be re-examined where the resident payee has filed a return, included the sum in income, and paid the tax due, and the payer is not an assessee in default. As the factual truth of the Form 26A and return-filing claims required verification, the matter was restored for fresh examination by the Assessing Officer. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 21 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294224