https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447122 A securitisation trust was treated as an assessee in default under s. 201 for failure to deduct TDS under s. 194LBC on payment of Excess Interest Spread (EIS) to the originator. The Tribunal held that s. 194LBC applies only where payment is "in respect of an investment" by an "investor", defined as a holder of PTC/SDI/security receipts issued by the trust. Since the originator had not subscribed to or held any such instruments and the minimum retention requirement was met through cash collateral/excess receivables, it was not an "investor", and EIS was merely residual surplus under the waterfall, not investment income; hence no TDS obligation arose. The s. 201 demand and interest were deleted and the appeal was allowed. en-us Thu, 30 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jan 2026 11:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447122 A securitisation trust was treated as an assessee in default under s. 201 for failure to deduct TDS under s. 194LBC on payment of Excess Interest Spread (EIS) to the originator. The Tribunal held that s. 194LBC applies only where payment is "in respect of an investment" by an "investor", defined as a holder of PTC/SDI/security receipts issued by the trust. Since the originator had not subscribed to or held any such instruments and the minimum retention requirement was met through cash collateral/excess receivables, it was not an "investor", and EIS was merely residual surplus under the waterfall, not investment income; hence no TDS obligation arose. The s. 201 demand and interest were deleted and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 30 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447122