<?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 913 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448514</link>
    <description>An assessment order can be revised under section 263 where it does not show enquiry into a materially relevant TDS issue and the record does not demonstrate that the Assessing Officer verified the assessee&#039;s explanation. Here, the issue concerned deduction of tax at source on winnings paid to players under section 194B. Although the assessee had furnished details on the payout mechanism, prize structure, and statutory threshold, the assessment order did not reveal any meaningful examination of those materials. The revisional authority was therefore justified in directing further enquiry, since the lack of visible application of mind rendered the order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2024 16:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=740848" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 913 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448514</link>
      <description>An assessment order can be revised under section 263 where it does not show enquiry into a materially relevant TDS issue and the record does not demonstrate that the Assessing Officer verified the assessee&#039;s explanation. Here, the issue concerned deduction of tax at source on winnings paid to players under section 194B. Although the assessee had furnished details on the payout mechanism, prize structure, and statutory threshold, the assessment order did not reveal any meaningful examination of those materials. The revisional authority was therefore justified in directing further enquiry, since the lack of visible application of mind rendered the order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448514</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>