https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417375 The court set aside the Tribunal's decision and remanded the case to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration. The court emphasized that the Tribunal erred in not following a previous decision and failing to properly consider the appellant's arguments regarding invoice splitting, continuous contracts, aggregation of payments based on truck numbers, and disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia). The court directed the AO to thoroughly examine the contracts between the appellant and truck operators and make a decision in accordance with the law, clarifying that the registration number of trucks is not relevant for determining the applicability of Section 194C. en-us Mon, 15 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Apr 2022 17:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417375 The court set aside the Tribunal's decision and remanded the case to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration. The court emphasized that the Tribunal erred in not following a previous decision and failing to properly consider the appellant's arguments regarding invoice splitting, continuous contracts, aggregation of payments based on truck numbers, and disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia). The court directed the AO to thoroughly examine the contracts between the appellant and truck operators and make a decision in accordance with the law, clarifying that the registration number of trucks is not relevant for determining the applicability of Section 194C. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 15 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417375