Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The case involved a dispute over short collection of TDS due to lower TDS certificates with different TANs issued by deductees. The Central Processing Centre (CPC) raised a demand for tax and interest, but the CIT(A) emphasized the duty of the assessee to inform suppliers about the new TAN and request revised certificates. The Tribunal held that the assessee, as the person responsible for TDS, complied with certificates issued u/s. 197 by deducting tax at source as per rates specified. The genuineness of the certificates was not in question. The procedure for obtaining lower rate deduction certificates under Rule 28(AA) was noted, emphasizing that certificates are valid for the named person responsible for deduction. The Tribunal, citing legal provisions and precedent, ruled in favor of the assessee, concluding no short deduction of tax occurred, and deleted the demand for tax and interest.
The case involved a dispute over short collection of TDS due to lower TDS certificates with different TANs issued by deductees. The Central Processing Centre (CPC) raised a demand for tax and interest, but the CIT(A) emphasized the duty of the assessee to inform suppliers about the new TAN and request revised certificates. The Tribunal held that the assessee, as the person responsible for TDS, complied with certificates issued u/s. 197 by deducting tax at source as per rates specified. The genuineness of the certificates was not in question. The procedure for obtaining lower rate deduction certificates under Rule 28(AA) was noted, emphasizing that certificates are valid for the named person responsible for deduction. The Tribunal, citing legal provisions and precedent, ruled in favor of the assessee, concluding no short deduction of tax occurred, and deleted the demand for tax and interest.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
