Just a moment...
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 assessee could be denied the benefit of Section 205 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 merely because Form 16A was not produced, when other reliable material indicated deduction of tax at source.
Analysis: Section 205 places a bar on calling upon the assessee to pay tax to the extent tax has been deducted at source. Form 16A is only one mode of proof of deduction and is not the sole evidentiary basis. Where the assessee produces other reliable material, such as declaration in the return, ledger account, complaint to the revenue, and surrounding circumstances showing deduction at source, the benefit of Section 205 cannot be denied merely because the deductor did not issue Form 16A or did not deposit the tax. The assessee cannot be made to suffer for the deductor's omission, and the revenue must verify the claim through inquiry rather than rejecting it on a technical objection.
Conclusion: The absence of Form 16A did not disentitle the assessee from protection under Section 205, and no error apparent on the face of the record was shown to justify review. The review failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Once deduction of tax at source is prima facie established, Section 205 prohibits direct demand against the assessee to that extent, and the benefit of the provision cannot be denied solely for want of Form 16A.