TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court allows Insurance Company to Deduct T.D.S. from Interest Component</h1> <h3>The New India Assurance Company Limited Versus Ramesh Kumar Tamrakar and Ors.</h3> The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, agreeing that the Insurance Company was justified in deducting T.D.S. from the interest component of the ... - Issues involved: Challenge to the legality and validity of order directing Insurance Company to deduct T.D.S. from award amount u/s 194-A(3)(ix) of Income Tax Act, 1961.Summary:Issue 1: Legality of T.D.S. deduction by Insurance CompanyThe petitioner challenged the order directing the Insurance Company to deduct T.D.S. from the award amount, arguing compliance with Section 194-A(3)(ix) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal directed the Insurance Company to deposit the T.D.S. amount, leading to the present dispute.Issue 2: Interpretation of Income Tax Act provisionsThe petitioner contended that T.D.S. deduction was mandatory u/s 194-A(3)(ix) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, citing judgments of Gujarat and M.P. High Courts. In contrast, the respondent argued against T.D.S. deduction from the interest component of the award amount.Issue 3: Applicability of Section 194-A of Income Tax ActSection 194-A mandates T.D.S. deduction on interest income, including compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The clause (ix) specifying the threshold for T.D.S. deduction was inserted in 2003, post the award date in this case.Judgment:The High Court agreed with the petitioner's stance, supported by precedents from Gujarat and M.P. High Courts. It held that the Insurance Company was justified in deducting T.D.S. from the interest component of the award amount. Consequently, the impugned order directing T.D.S. deposit was quashed, and each party was directed to bear their own costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
