Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
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 4830 
Join Channel 
