https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169864 The appeals were admitted for consideration on merits after condonation of delay. The demands under section 201/201(1A) read with section 194H were upheld, but the court noted the absence of a finding that franchisees had not paid due taxes. The court emphasized that recovery provisions require proof of non-recovery from the primary tax liability holder. It clarified interest under section 201(1A) is compensatory and only applies until tax payment. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication with fair hearing and a detailed order. en-us Wed, 26 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Oct 2014 17:04:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169864 The appeals were admitted for consideration on merits after condonation of delay. The demands under section 201/201(1A) read with section 194H were upheld, but the court noted the absence of a finding that franchisees had not paid due taxes. The court emphasized that recovery provisions require proof of non-recovery from the primary tax liability holder. It clarified interest under section 201(1A) is compensatory and only applies until tax payment. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication with fair hearing and a detailed order. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 26 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169864