This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Proviso to Sec. 201(1) and 2nd proviso to sec. 40(a)(ia) should be viewed in same manner
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- DCIT (TDS) Vs Punjab Infratructure & Development Board (ITAT Chandigarh)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Related Assessment Year
- 2009-10
- Courts
- All ITAT, ITAT Chandigarh
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Advertisement
Brief of the case:
When payee or resident has filed its return of income disclosing the payment received by and in which the income earned by it is embedded and has also paid tax on such income, the Assessee would not be treated as a person in default. Chandigarh Bench of ITAT held in the above in various appeals against Punjab Infratructure & Development Board, Chandigarh. ITAT relied upon the case of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage (P) Ltd Vs. CIT in [2007] 293 ITR 226 (SC), wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that where the ...
SIR, DEDUCTEES FILED THERE I.T. RETURN . BUT ITO TDS SURVEY OFFICE AND CEASES BANK ACCOUNT FOR NON DEDUCTION OF TDS U/S 194J AND 194C. APPEAL TIME IS EXPIRED. HOW CAN I PROCEED MY CASE BEFORE AUTHORITIES.