TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 1526
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts in WPL 2444/24 : Ms. Mamta Omle,. For the Respondents in WPL 13517/24 : Mr. Ravi Rattesar,. P.C. 1. These are batch of petitions wherein the petitioners have prayed for similar substantive reliefs namely praying that the impugned demand issued to the petitioners by respondent No. 1, which is stated to be on account of non-deposit of the TDS amounts by respondent No. 2 (petitioners' employer) be quashed and set aside. For convenience, we note the prayers as made in the first petition [Writ Petition (L) No. 2442 of 2024; Aslam Checkar Vs. Income Tax Officer & Ors.] which read thus:- a) Issue a writ of certiorari thereby calling for the record of proceedings culminating into issuance of the Impugned Demand dated 12 Januar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....faults of respondent No. 2 in statutory payments like provident fund etc. In such circumstances, the petitioners concerned with their survival were constrained to leave respondent No. 2's employment. At such point of time, there were substantial dues payable to the petitioners including salary for the period prior to petitioners' leaving the services of respondent No. 2. 3. It is the petitioners' case that on such backdrop the petitioners were shocked to receive from respondent No. 1 the impugned notices demanding payment of income tax alongwith interest, on account of non-deposit of TDS amount by respondent No. 2, which according to the petitioners, were shown to have been deducted from the salary slips as issued to the petitioners. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uctee assessee. Vide letter of even number dated 01.06.2015, the Board had issued directions to the field officers that in case of an assessee whose tax has been deducted at source but not deposited to the Government's account by the deductor, the deductee assessee shall not be called upon to pay the demand to the extent tax has been deducted from his income. It was further specified that section 205 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 puts a bar on direct demand against the assessee in such cases and the demand on account of tax credit mismatch in such situations cannot be enforced coercively. 2. However, instances have come to the notice of the Board that these directions are not being strictly followed by the field officers....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itioners. Accepting such statement made on behalf of the Revenue, those petitions were disposed of. In this view of the matter, learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners would be entitled to the reliefs as prayed for. 6. Responding to the contentions as urged on behalf of the petitioners, learned Counsel for the Revenue submits that the provisions of Section 205 are very clear and if the case of the petitioners is accepted, certainly petitioners are required to submit all materials before the Assessing Officer and which may be taken into consideration and appropriate orders can be passed in that regard as directed by this Court in Sachin S. Ghadge's case. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that ....