Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>ITAT Cancels Penalty for Cable Network Operator Over Tax Deduction Issue</h1> The ITAT canceled the penalty imposed under section 271C of the Income Tax Act for the appellant, a cable network operator, for assessment years 2006-07 ... Penalty u/s 271C of the Act – Failure to deduct TDS u/s 194C of the Act – Payment made to broadcasters of different TV channels on account of air time charges – Held that:- Following ORTEL COMMUNICATIONS LTD Versus ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) [2013 (6) TMI 373 - ITAT CUTTACK] - levy of penalty u/s 271C is not automatic - Before levying penalty, the concerned officer is required to find out that even if there was any failure referred to in the concerned provision the same was without a reasonable cause - The initial burden is on the assessee to show that there existed reasonable cause which was the reason Tor the failure referred to in the concerned provision - Thereafter the officer dealing with the matter has to consider the explanation offered by the assessee or the person, as the case may be. An honest belief founded upon reasonable grounds, of the existence of a state of circumstances, which assuming them to be true, would reasonably lead any ordinary prudent and cautious man, placed in the position of the person concerned, to come to the conclusion that the same was the right thing to do - The assessee has given explanation before the authorities that the due to circumstances prevailing and under bonafide belief that tax was not required to be deducted at source U/S.194C on the payments - the non-deduction of tax at source on such payments cannot be said to be without a reasonable cause within the meaning of Section 273C - the penalty levied u/s 271C is not justified and is liable to be set aside – Decided in favour of Assessee. Issues:Appeal against penalty under section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08.Analysis:The case involves appeals against penalty orders under section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. The appellant, a cable network operator, failed to deduct tax under section 194C from payments made to TV channel owners for air time charges. The penalty proceedings were initiated as the appellant did not appear, leading the JCIT (TDS) to presume no reasonable cause for the failure. The appellant contended that the payments were for content purchase and not subject to TDS under section 194C. The appellant argued a reasonable cause for non-deduction based on the belief that TDS was not required, supported by the payment of due tax before the filing deadline and compliance with PAN and account details. Reference was made to legal precedents and the ITAT Cuttack Bench's decision in a similar case for the assessment year 2008-09 where the penalty was deleted.The ITAT reviewed the appellant's contentions and considered the previous decision in the appellant's favor for the assessment year 2008-09. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a reasonable cause for failure to deduct tax at source, as per the provisions of the law. It was highlighted that the appellant's belief, supported by legal opinions and compliance, constituted a reasonable cause. The Tribunal noted that the issue was debatable and new at the time, and the appellant's actions were in line with legal interpretations. The Tribunal concluded that the non-deduction of tax at source was not without a reasonable cause, as the appellant's belief was founded on reasonable grounds. Therefore, the penalty under section 271C was deemed unjustified and canceled, aligning with the decision in the appellant's previous case for the assessment year 2008-09.In conclusion, the ITAT upheld the appellant's appeal, deleting the penalty imposed by the AO under section 271C for both the assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. The decision was based on the presence of a reasonable cause for the failure to deduct tax at source, as supported by legal interpretations and compliance with tax obligations.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found