Held that the assessing authority at first instance was not for the reason that the declarations were not produced as required under section 194(6). The disallowance was on a specious finding that the payments made by the assessee were not to transport contractors but to their agents. Even if the assessing authority did entertain a doubt in that regard, he ought to have considered the declarations furnished by the contractor that were produced before him  and given reasons as to why those declarations could not be accepted on their face value. The Commissioner (Appeals) perused the declarations and found them to be genuine and arrived at a correct decision deleting the disallowance made by the assessing authority under section 40(a)(ia).  The Tribunal was not justified in remanding the matter to the assessing authority for a fresh adjudication on this issue.  (AY.2013-14)