Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
861 to 880 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A short-deduction demand on purchase of immovable property was held unsustainable where the seller's PAN was later regularised through Aadhaar linkage within the CBDT circular period, so the higher TDS rate for an inoperative PAN did not apply and the related demand under section 200A had to be deleted. Independently, the proviso to section 201(1) protected the deductor because the seller had filed the return, declared the capital gains, and paid tax on the transaction, so the deductor could not be treated as an assessee-in-default. The Tribunal also noted that similar relief had already been granted in the co-owner's case.
A short-deduction demand on purchase of immovable property was held unsustainable where the seller's PAN was later regularised through Aadhaar linkage within the CBDT circular period, so the higher TDS rate for an inoperative PAN did not apply and the related demand under section 200A had to be deleted. Independently, the proviso to section 201(1) protected the deductor because the seller had filed the return, declared the capital gains, and paid tax on the transaction, so the deductor could not be treated as an assessee-in-default. The Tribunal also noted that similar relief had already been granted in the co-owner's case.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.