https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468569 Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) cannot be sustained merely because Form 26A under Rule 31ACB was not furnished, where the resident payees had included the payments in their returns and discharged tax liability. The Tribunal treated the absence of Form 26A as a technical lapse, since the record showed that the recipients had accounted for the receipts and there was no basis to continue the tax disallowance once tax had already been paid by the payees. The payer was therefore not to be subjected to further tax recovery solely on account of the procedural defect, and the disallowance was directed to be deleted. en-us Mon, 03 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 May 2026 17:06:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468569 Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) cannot be sustained merely because Form 26A under Rule 31ACB was not furnished, where the resident payees had included the payments in their returns and discharged tax liability. The Tribunal treated the absence of Form 26A as a technical lapse, since the record showed that the recipients had accounted for the receipts and there was no basis to continue the tax disallowance once tax had already been paid by the payees. The payer was therefore not to be subjected to further tax recovery solely on account of the procedural defect, and the disallowance was directed to be deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 03 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468569