Bank account freezing requires statutory authority; anti-money-laundering compliance and KYC monitoring do not permit unilateral indefinite restrictio...
Handicraft job work receives concessional GST only for registered principals and predominantly handmade goods; commercial resin articles remain taxabl...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The pre-amended Section 200A of the Income Tax Act did not permit processing of TDS statements for default in payment of late fee u/s 234E. Hence, late fee charged for belated filing of TDS quarterly returns could not be recovered through processing u/s 200A. As per Karnataka Grameen Bank case, the amendment allowing imposition of fee u/s 234E during processing u/s 200A came into effect from 01.06.2015 with prospective effect. Therefore, levy of late fee u/s 234E would be illegal for TDS statements pertaining to periods prior to 01.06.2015. Consequently, the demand raised with reference to Section 234E cannot be countenanced under the pre-amended provision of Section 200A and requires quashing.
The pre-amended Section 200A of the Income Tax Act did not permit processing of TDS statements for default in payment of late fee u/s 234E. Hence, late fee charged for belated filing of TDS quarterly returns could not be recovered through processing u/s 200A. As per Karnataka Grameen Bank case, the amendment allowing imposition of fee u/s 234E during processing u/s 200A came into effect from 01.06.2015 with prospective effect. Therefore, levy of late fee u/s 234E would be illegal for TDS statements pertaining to periods prior to 01.06.2015. Consequently, the demand raised with reference to Section 234E cannot be countenanced under the pre-amended provision of Section 200A and requires quashing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
