https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14633 Whether the employer could be treated as an assessee deemed in default under s. 201(1) r/w s. 192 for non-deduction of TDS on certain employee allowances and consequently be liable under ss. 201(1) and 201(1A) was examined. The HC held that the Tribunal committed no error of law in finding that, given the authorities' non-pursuit after initial notices, a rectification order in favour of an employee, and the primary tax liability resting on employees, the employer had an honest and bona fide belief that s. 201 would not apply; later compliance also supported that view. The HC found no substantial question of law and dismissed the revenue's appeals, sustaining the Tribunal's quashing of the s. 201(1)/201(1A) orders. en-us Wed, 01 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Jan 2026 12:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14633 Whether the employer could be treated as an assessee deemed in default under s. 201(1) r/w s. 192 for non-deduction of TDS on certain employee allowances and consequently be liable under ss. 201(1) and 201(1A) was examined. The HC held that the Tribunal committed no error of law in finding that, given the authorities' non-pursuit after initial notices, a rectification order in favour of an employee, and the primary tax liability resting on employees, the employer had an honest and bona fide belief that s. 201 would not apply; later compliance also supported that view. The HC found no substantial question of law and dismissed the revenue's appeals, sustaining the Tribunal's quashing of the s. 201(1)/201(1A) orders. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 01 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14633