<?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>Tax Deduction Certificate Decision Flawed, Court Finds Violation of Rule 28-AA; Case Sent Back for Re-evaluation.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75306</link>
    <description>Application u/s 197 for issuance of a Lower Deduction of Tax Certificate - The High Court observed that, a plain reading of Rule 28-AA makes it clear that the &#039;satisfaction&#039; needs to be recorded/determined by A.O. after taking into consideration the four factors mentioned in sub-rule (2) of Rule 28-AA. Thus, it is not the subjective satisfaction of A.O., but an objective satisfaction which must be based on Clauses (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 28-AA. - Since impugned orders are passed in clear violation of Rule 28-AA, the High Court held that decision making process adopted by the respondents runs contrary to the requirement of law, i.e. Rule 28-AA. - Matter restored back for readjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:08:38 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:08:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=745280" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tax Deduction Certificate Decision Flawed, Court Finds Violation of Rule 28-AA; Case Sent Back for Re-evaluation.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75306</link>
      <description>Application u/s 197 for issuance of a Lower Deduction of Tax Certificate - The High Court observed that, a plain reading of Rule 28-AA makes it clear that the &#039;satisfaction&#039; needs to be recorded/determined by A.O. after taking into consideration the four factors mentioned in sub-rule (2) of Rule 28-AA. Thus, it is not the subjective satisfaction of A.O., but an objective satisfaction which must be based on Clauses (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 28-AA. - Since impugned orders are passed in clear violation of Rule 28-AA, the High Court held that decision making process adopted by the respondents runs contrary to the requirement of law, i.e. Rule 28-AA. - Matter restored back for readjudication.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:08:38 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75306</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>