<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (1) TMI 275 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447876</link>
    <description>Delhi HC held that where an employer deducted TDS from petitioner&#039;s salary but failed to deposit it with authorities, the petitioner cannot be held liable for outstanding tax demand. Relying on Jasjit Singh precedent, the court ruled that since petitioner accepted salary after TDS deduction, employer bears responsibility for depositing the tax. The demand notice dated 04.02.2019 was set aside and revenue was directed to allow TDS credit to petitioner for Assessment Year 2013-14.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2024 12:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=739216" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 275 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447876</link>
      <description>Delhi HC held that where an employer deducted TDS from petitioner&#039;s salary but failed to deposit it with authorities, the petitioner cannot be held liable for outstanding tax demand. Relying on Jasjit Singh precedent, the court ruled that since petitioner accepted salary after TDS deduction, employer bears responsibility for depositing the tax. The demand notice dated 04.02.2019 was set aside and revenue was directed to allow TDS credit to petitioner for Assessment Year 2013-14.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447876</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>