TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 2046
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it Jurisdiction Case No. 20499 of 2025 With Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6441 of 2026 - -<br>Income Tax<br>Dr. Shyam Bihari Singh son of Ram Janam Singh Versus The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Director, Animal Husbandry, Patna, District Animal Husbandry of officer, Sub-Divisional Animal Husbandry Officer, Bhabhua, The Union of India through Secretary, The Central Board of Direct Taxes through the Chairman, Delhi, The Chief Commissioner Income-Tax, Patna, The Chief Commissioner Income Tax (TDS) and Assistant Commissioner, Income Tax, Central Processing Centre, Bengaluru HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD AND HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 20499 of 2025) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....respondent, therefore, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Department submits that to duly verify the facts stated in the affidavit of respondent nos. 5 and 6, the Commissioner, Income Tax, TDS, Patna be added as one of the respondents. 4. In view of the above submission, let the Commissioner, Income Tax (TDS), Patna, Central Revenue Building, Veerchand Patel Marg, Patna be added as respondent no. 9 in course of the day. 5. Since Ms. Archana Sinha, learned Senior Standing Counsel accepts notice for the respondent no. 9, no separate notice is required to be issued. 6. The respondent nos. 7 and 8 have not filed any counter affidavit even as the matter is being heard for last two dates. We do not understand this approach of respon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ears to this Court that respondent no. 4 has not made any statement in his counter affidavit that earlier a statement/return of the TDS for the relevant years was filed by the Department. 11. To this Court, it appears that the statements made in the counter affidavit of respondent no. 4 are only half-hearted statements. The fact is that the respondent no. 4 has not filed the statement of TDS and return thereof. It is not a case of carrying out corrections/amendments in the filed return of the TDS, therefore, the respondent no. 4 is not correct in taking a stand such as in paragraph '9' of the counter affidavit. We reject this stand. 12. We would briefly say that in terms of the scheme of Sections 200, 200-A and 201 of the Act of 1961,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....provision exists in the statute book for the recovery of the money from the assets of an assessee in default taking the said money as charge on all his assets, no separate direction from this Court is needed. Failure to act in terms of the statute cannot be explained by seeking a direction from the Court to act. It is for the competent authority in the Department to explain as to why they have not acted in terms of the statute so far against the assessee in default. 16. From the scheme of the statute, it is evident that the employer who deducts the money from the salary of the employee as a Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) acts as an agent and a hand of the Department of Income Tax in the matter of deduction, collection and remittance thereo....