TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the amount deducted at source by the Corporation under the departmental directions was required to be deposited with the Commercial Tax Department, and whether the appellant could be fastened with liability to pay the same amount again.
Analysis: The deduction was made pursuant to the Commissioner's circular and the departmental instructions governing the Adarna Scheme. The dispute between the appellant and the Corporation regarding the ultimate entitlement to the supplies was held to be unrelated to the statutory obligation to deposit tax already deducted at source. Once the tax had been deducted from the consideration payable to the appellant, the Corporation was bound to remit that amount to the Department, and the pendency of arbitration or any claim of overpayment did not affect that obligation.
Conclusion: The amount deducted at source had to be deposited by the Corporation, and the appellant could not be required to bear the same tax burden again.
Final Conclusion: The appellant obtained relief to the extent that the Corporation was directed to remit the balance of the deducted tax within the stipulated time, while the dispute regarding the inter se entitlement of the parties was left untouched.
Ratio Decidendi: Where tax is deducted at source pursuant to lawful departmental directions, the deducting entity must remit it to the revenue, and collateral disputes between the contracting parties do not alter that statutory obligation.
TaxTMI 
