Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the sum of Rs. 1,24,199 paid by the assessee as tax liability arising from failure to deduct tax at source from payments to a non-resident was deductible as business expenditure under section 10(1) or section 10(2)(xv), or as a bad debt under section 10(2)(xi) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.
Analysis: The liability arose directly from section 18(3B) and section 18(7) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, which required deduction of tax at source from payments to a non-resident and treated failure to do so as default. The assessee was not paying its own business liability, but was discharging a statutory burden imposed because of non-compliance with that mandate. Such payment had at most a connection with the business, but it did not spring directly from the carrying on of the business and was not an expense laid out wholly and exclusively for business purposes. The amount was also not a trading debt arising in the ordinary course of business, and therefore could not be treated as a bad debt.
Conclusion: The sum was not deductible under section 10(1) or section 10(2)(xv), and it was not allowable as a bad debt under section 10(2)(xi); the finding was against the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The reference was answered in the negative, and the revenue's view was upheld.
Ratio Decidendi: A payment made in discharge of a statutory liability imposed for failure to deduct tax at source is penal in character and is not an expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the assessee's business, nor a trading debt deductible as bad debt.