https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775410 The ITAT Rajkot set aside the CIT(A) order and remanded the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication regarding TDS non-deduction under section 194A. The tribunal held that under the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia), which has retrospective effect from 01/04/2005, the payer is not in default if the payee has included the payment in its income and paid tax thereon. The AO was directed to verify whether the payee had declared the amount and paid tax; if so, the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) should be deleted. The decision aligns with the Delhi HC ruling in CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township Pvt. Ltd. affirming the curative retrospective effect of the proviso. en-us Mon, 02 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Jul 2025 08:28:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775410 The ITAT Rajkot set aside the CIT(A) order and remanded the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication regarding TDS non-deduction under section 194A. The tribunal held that under the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia), which has retrospective effect from 01/04/2005, the payer is not in default if the payee has included the payment in its income and paid tax thereon. The AO was directed to verify whether the payee had declared the amount and paid tax; if so, the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) should be deleted. The decision aligns with the Delhi HC ruling in CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township Pvt. Ltd. affirming the curative retrospective effect of the proviso. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 02 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775410