https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459174 ITAT Indore remanded TDS demand u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) back to AO for fresh adjudication. The tribunal found AO failed to examine crucial factors including terms of distributor agreements and accounting treatment to determine whether payments constituted commission under section 194H or mere discount. The case involved assessee's failure to deduct TDS on payments to distributors/dealers. ITAT emphasized both contractual terms and books of account treatment are essential for determining transaction nature and consequential TDS liability. Appeals allowed for statistical purposes requiring proper verification by AO. en-us Thu, 25 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Dec 2024 19:05:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459174 ITAT Indore remanded TDS demand u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) back to AO for fresh adjudication. The tribunal found AO failed to examine crucial factors including terms of distributor agreements and accounting treatment to determine whether payments constituted commission under section 194H or mere discount. The case involved assessee's failure to deduct TDS on payments to distributors/dealers. ITAT emphasized both contractual terms and books of account treatment are essential for determining transaction nature and consequential TDS liability. Appeals allowed for statistical purposes requiring proper verification by AO. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 25 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459174