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...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
821 to 840 of 95955 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 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
