Jurisdictional validity: notice issued by a non jurisdictional officer invalidates reassessment where no formal transfer or independent verification o...
Page of 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5861 to 5880 of 96456 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Supreme Court examined the tax treatment of amounts recovered by an employer from employees as provident or ESI contributions, noting such sums are taxable as income when received. The Court explained that deduction under the employer-deduction provision is available only if the employer credits the employees' contributions to the relevant fund by the 'due date', which the Explanation defines as the date required under the applicable Act, rule, order or notification. The Court identified two conflicting interpretations: one requiring crediting by the statutory fund due date for deduction, and an alternative treating employee and employer contributions alike under the non-obstante clause permitting deduction if deposited by return due date.
Supreme Court examined the tax treatment of amounts recovered by an employer from employees as provident or ESI contributions, noting such sums are taxable as income when received. The Court explained that deduction under the employer-deduction provision is available only if the employer credits the employees' contributions to the relevant fund by the 'due date', which the Explanation defines as the date required under the applicable Act, rule, order or notification. The Court identified two conflicting interpretations: one requiring crediting by the statutory fund due date for deduction, and an alternative treating employee and employer contributions alike under the non-obstante clause permitting deduction if deposited by return due date.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.