https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465586 Whether amounts arising from transactions between the assessee company and its stockists constituted "commission or brokerage" requiring TDS under s. 194H, and consequently justified treating the assessee as an "assessee in default" under ss. 201(1)/201(1A), was decided by applying the co-ordinate Bench ruling in the assessee's own case for the earlier AY on identical facts. Following that binding precedent and maintaining consistency, the Tribunal held that the disputed stockist dealings were in the nature of sale transactions and did not attract s. 194H, and the foundation for the s. 201 demand failed. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed. en-us Mon, 05 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Dec 2025 20:13:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465586 Whether amounts arising from transactions between the assessee company and its stockists constituted "commission or brokerage" requiring TDS under s. 194H, and consequently justified treating the assessee as an "assessee in default" under ss. 201(1)/201(1A), was decided by applying the co-ordinate Bench ruling in the assessee's own case for the earlier AY on identical facts. Following that binding precedent and maintaining consistency, the Tribunal held that the disputed stockist dealings were in the nature of sale transactions and did not attract s. 194H, and the foundation for the s. 201 demand failed. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 05 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465586