https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469844 A deductor bank was considered in relation to leave travel concession payments made to employees without TDS, and the Tribunal examined whether it could be treated as an assessee in default under section 201(1) with interest under section 201(1A). It noted that the primary tax liability rested with the employee, while the deductor's role under the TDS provisions was to collect tax at source as an aid to recovery. On the facts, the Revenue had employee details but had not shown effective action against the employees or material indicating negligence or mala fides by the bank. An incorrect estimate alone was held insufficient to fasten default liability on the deductor, and the demand was set aside. en-us Thu, 13 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jul 2026 20:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469844 A deductor bank was considered in relation to leave travel concession payments made to employees without TDS, and the Tribunal examined whether it could be treated as an assessee in default under section 201(1) with interest under section 201(1A). It noted that the primary tax liability rested with the employee, while the deductor's role under the TDS provisions was to collect tax at source as an aid to recovery. On the facts, the Revenue had employee details but had not shown effective action against the employees or material indicating negligence or mala fides by the bank. An incorrect estimate alone was held insufficient to fasten default liability on the deductor, and the demand was set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 13 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469844