https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456149 The ITAT Delhi held that the assessee bank was in default under section 201(1)(1A) for failing to deduct TDS under section 192 on LTC reimbursements to employees, including foreign travel through circuitous routes. Despite the Madras HC's interim order stating LTC payments would not constitute income requiring TDS deduction, the SC's subsequent decision affirmed that banks must deduct TDS on LTC payments to employees. Following the SC precedent, the ITAT ruled the assessee was liable for non-deduction of tax at source and dismissed the appeals. en-us Tue, 27 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Jul 2024 19:57:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456149 The ITAT Delhi held that the assessee bank was in default under section 201(1)(1A) for failing to deduct TDS under section 192 on LTC reimbursements to employees, including foreign travel through circuitous routes. Despite the Madras HC's interim order stating LTC payments would not constitute income requiring TDS deduction, the SC's subsequent decision affirmed that banks must deduct TDS on LTC payments to employees. Following the SC precedent, the ITAT ruled the assessee was liable for non-deduction of tax at source and dismissed the appeals. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 27 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456149