https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431727 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision in the case, ruling that the repair expenditure of Rs.5,02,24,450 was revenue in nature and not capital expenditure. Additionally, the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source on railway siding and demurrage charges was deemed unjustified, as these charges were deducted by SAIL and treated as reimbursements. The Tribunal emphasized adherence to statutory provisions and commercial expediency, ultimately dismissing the revenue's appeal. en-us Wed, 14 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Dec 2022 10:03:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431727 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision in the case, ruling that the repair expenditure of Rs.5,02,24,450 was revenue in nature and not capital expenditure. Additionally, the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source on railway siding and demurrage charges was deemed unjustified, as these charges were deducted by SAIL and treated as reimbursements. The Tribunal emphasized adherence to statutory provisions and commercial expediency, ultimately dismissing the revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 14 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431727