MR. SHEKHAR DADARKAR PROP. M/S. S.D CONSTRUCTION ,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 31(1), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) allows for deduction if the payees have disclosed the income and paid taxes. The assessee submitted a certificate in Form 26A, but the AO required further evidence like ITRs and audit reports. The Tribunal found that while the assessee discharged the primary onus by submitting Form 26A, the AO has the power to examine the veracity of these forms and seek information from the payees. Therefore, the matter was restored to the AO for further inquiry.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Mr. Shekhar Dadarkar (Proprietor of M/s. S.D. Construction), appealed against disallowance of interest payments made to Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) and an exempt trust. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the payments under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act for failure to deduct TDS. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the disallowance.
What were the issues?
Whether the disallowance of interest payments under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS is justified when the payee has disclosed the income and paid taxes, and what evidence is required to prove such disclosure and payment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI
Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR
Per Bench All the above titled appeals filed by the assessee, emanate from the appellate orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC,Delhi dated 27.04.2024 with regard to the assessment order passed under
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)
- Rekha Agarwal, Jaipur vs ITO WD 4(1), JaipurITA 844/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Cdg Petchem Limited, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward - 1(1), HyderabadITA 1900/HYD/2025[2018-2019]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-2019
- M/S. Shree Laminators Ltd., Kolkata vs DCIT, Circle 4(4), KolkataITA 1534/KOL/2026[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-2012
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Jharkhand Contractors Association Thro Its President- Pramod Kumar vs. Bharat Coking Coal LTD. Thro Its Chairman Cum Managing DirectorJharkhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Isc Processors Private Limited vs. Superintendent,Range-Iv, Burrabazar Div, CGST And Cx, Kolkata (N) Commissionerate And AnrCalcutta · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Raashi Constructions vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Bidasaria Fenster Solutions vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 13 Oct 2026
- Amit Agency vs. Commissioner, CGST And CxPatna · 13 Oct 2026