https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407271 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the demand for interest under Section 201(1A), ruling that the assessee was not obligated to comply with a law that was not in force at the time of the transaction. The retrospective amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2012, could not impose a new obligation on the assessee. Furthermore, as the recipient had already paid taxes on the capital gains, the purpose of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) was fulfilled. Consequently, the appeal by the Assessing Officer was dismissed, and the cross-objection by the assessee was deemed infructuous. en-us Fri, 30 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 May 2021 08:37:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407271 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the demand for interest under Section 201(1A), ruling that the assessee was not obligated to comply with a law that was not in force at the time of the transaction. The retrospective amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2012, could not impose a new obligation on the assessee. Furthermore, as the recipient had already paid taxes on the capital gains, the purpose of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) was fulfilled. Consequently, the appeal by the Assessing Officer was dismissed, and the cross-objection by the assessee was deemed infructuous. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 30 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407271