Case Law Details
Harshdip Singh Dhillon Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)
Introduction: A recent judgment by the Delhi High Court in the case of Harshdip Singh Dhillon vs. Union of India sheds light on the responsibility of employers concerning Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) and its implications on employees. The petitioner sought to set aside a demand letter dated 04.02.2019, addressing an outstanding tax liability for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The crux of the matter revolves around the petitioner’s employer, Tulip Telecom Ltd., failing to deposit TDS with the Income Tax authorities for the assessment year 2012-13.
Detailed Analysis: The petitioner, an Associate Vice-President at Tulip Telecom Ltd. from November 2011 to May 2013, faced tax-related challenges post his resignation. Despite the employer deducting TDS on salaries for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13, the deducted tax for 2012-13 was not deposited. The employer also failed to issue the necessary TDS certificate, prompting the petitioner to inform tax officials, albeit with no consequential action.
The subsequent demand notices raised by the revenue led to legal proceedings. The petitioner contended that the respondent’s demand for outstanding tax liability was unjust, considering the employer’s failure to fulfill its TDS obligations. The respondent argued that the employer was not obliged to deduct tax for certain months, thus absolving them from the duty to deposit TDS.
The court, relying on precedent, highlighted Section 205 of the Income Tax Act, stating that the deductee (employee) should not be held responsible for the deposit of TDS by the deductor (employer). The judgment referenced the case of Sanjay Sudan vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, emphasizing that coercive measures against the petitioner were unwarranted.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
my son co deducted tds not paid we paid tax fully can we claim that amount now.