Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Section 206AA read with Rule 114AAA(3) applied where the seller's PAN was inoperative on the date of property purchase because it was not linked with Aadhaar, so higher TDS was prima facie attracted. However, the Tribunal held that the buyer should not bear higher TDS if evidence shows the seller disclosed the transaction in her return and paid due taxes, following the principle underlying section 40(a)(ia) and section 201(1). The demand was therefore not finally sustained and the matter was remitted for de novo verification of the seller's tax disclosure and payment.
Section 206AA read with Rule 114AAA(3) applied where the seller's PAN was inoperative on the date of property purchase because it was not linked with Aadhaar, so higher TDS was prima facie attracted. However, the Tribunal held that the buyer should not bear higher TDS if evidence shows the seller disclosed the transaction in her return and paid due taxes, following the principle underlying section 40(a)(ia) and section 201(1). The demand was therefore not finally sustained and the matter was remitted for de novo verification of the seller's tax disclosure and payment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.