New LODR Fifth Amendment reshapes related party transaction rules, disclosure duties, and non-convertible security communication timelines under Sched...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
8841 to 8860 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that the appellant-employer could not be treated as an "assessee in default" under s.201(1) for non-deduction of TDS under s.192 on Leave Travel Concession reimbursements for AY 2016-17. In view of subsisting interim directions of the Madras HC during the relevant financial year, the appellant had no operative obligation to deduct tax "at the time of payment," a precondition for invoking s.201. Consequently, interest under s.201(1A) was also held inapplicable. HC further noted that the first proviso to s.201(1) protects a payer where the payee has duly accounted for such amounts in the return of income. Earlier adverse findings of the SC for a different assessment year were distinguished. The appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee.
HC held that the appellant-employer could not be treated as an "assessee in default" under s.201(1) for non-deduction of TDS under s.192 on Leave Travel Concession reimbursements for AY 2016-17. In view of subsisting interim directions of the Madras HC during the relevant financial year, the appellant had no operative obligation to deduct tax "at the time of payment," a precondition for invoking s.201. Consequently, interest under s.201(1A) was also held inapplicable. HC further noted that the first proviso to s.201(1) protects a payer where the payee has duly accounted for such amounts in the return of income. Earlier adverse findings of the SC for a different assessment year were distinguished. The appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.