<?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>Binding interim judicial directions barred TDS default for leave fare concession payments, and penalty fell with demand</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100811</link>
    <description>Non-deduction of tax on leave fare concession payments made while binding interim directions of the Madras High Court were in force did not render the assessee an assessee in default. The Tribunal held that the statutory TDS obligation could not be enforced in disregard of those judicial directions, and the later Supreme Court ruling on the substantive taxability of the payments could not retrospectively create default liability for that earlier period. The demands under section 201(1) and section 201(1A) were deleted. Once the default demand failed, the consequential penalty under section 271C also could not survive and was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 08:32:35 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 08:32:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907146" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Binding interim judicial directions barred TDS default for leave fare concession payments, and penalty fell with demand</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100811</link>
      <description>Non-deduction of tax on leave fare concession payments made while binding interim directions of the Madras High Court were in force did not render the assessee an assessee in default. The Tribunal held that the statutory TDS obligation could not be enforced in disregard of those judicial directions, and the later Supreme Court ruling on the substantive taxability of the payments could not retrospectively create default liability for that earlier period. The demands under section 201(1) and section 201(1A) were deleted. Once the default demand failed, the consequential penalty under section 271C also could not survive and was deleted.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 08:32:35 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100811</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>