TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 748
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Appellate Tribunal ('the ITAT') in ITA No.3838/Del./2017 for the Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Learned counsel for the Appellant states that the ITAT has erred in deleting disallowance under Section 40a(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') as assessee had done short deduction of tax in violation of Section 197(1) of the Act. 3. He also states that the ITAT has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,03,53,150/- made by the assessing officer under Section 40A(2) of the Act in spite of the fact that assessee, during the course of assessment proceedings, failed to justify the service being rendered by the director Shri Sunil Baijal to the company for which he was earning such a huge amount of remuneration. 4. A perusal of the paper boo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....According to revenue, the assessee has deducted tax @ 1% u/s. 194C(2) of the Act as against the actual deduction to be made at 10% u/s. 194I of the Act, thereby lesser deduction of tax. The revenue has made out a case of lesser deduction of tax and that also under different head and accordingly disallowed the payments proportionately by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Ld. CIT, DR also argued that there is no word like failure used in section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and it referred to only non-deduction of tax and disallowance of such payments. According to him, it does not refer to genuineness of the payment or otherwise but addition u/s. 40(a)(ia) can be made even though payments are genuine but tax is not deducte....