https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767340 The HC dismissed the petitioner's challenge to TDS deduction under Section 194N on government subsidy amounts deposited in the respondent bank. The court held that the bank was duty-bound to deduct tax on payments despite the petitioner's claim that the amounts were government subsidies. The court clarified that if no tax was ultimately payable, refunds would be available after assessment completion following return filing under Section 139. The HC emphasized that Section 194N mandates 2% deduction on cash withdrawals to promote cashless economy, noting that unlike other provisions, Section 194N does not permit applications for nil/lower rate deductions under Section 197. en-us Tue, 25 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Mar 2025 08:41:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767340 The HC dismissed the petitioner's challenge to TDS deduction under Section 194N on government subsidy amounts deposited in the respondent bank. The court held that the bank was duty-bound to deduct tax on payments despite the petitioner's claim that the amounts were government subsidies. The court clarified that if no tax was ultimately payable, refunds would be available after assessment completion following return filing under Section 139. The HC emphasized that Section 194N mandates 2% deduction on cash withdrawals to promote cashless economy, noting that unlike other provisions, Section 194N does not permit applications for nil/lower rate deductions under Section 197. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 25 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767340