|
The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 4002 (Pat-HC) CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950
Article 226
No reason to interfere with notice issued, more so from the return filed by petitioner, it did not appear as to whether, and if any, amount of component of TCS was deposited by petitioner and officer had to adjudicate the amount only after hearing the parties and affording adequate opportunity of filing reply and substantial compliance of principles of natural justice. Thus Petitioner was directed to appear before Assistant Director on which date the petitioner shall file additional material to Assistant Director.
|
Writ - Payment of tax collectable at source under section 206C - Applicability of section 206C to a contract of settlement of Balu Ghats -
Petitioner by way of this petition had sought relief that notice directing payment of tax collectable at source under section 206C issued by Revenue authority be quashed and for a declaration that section 206C was not applicable to a contract of settlement of Balu Ghats. Petitioner further sought for a declaration that section 206C applies only at the point of debiting of the amounts payable by assessee or lessee to the account of licensee or lessor at the time of receipt of such amount from the said buyer and not at any point of time subsequent thereto. Held: There was no reason to interfere with notice issued, more so from the return filed by petitioner, it did not appear as to whether, amount of component of TCS, if any, was deposited by the petitioner. It could not be accepted that Assistant Director had already prejudged the issue inasmuch as he had asked the petitioner to pay the amount by way of a Demand Draft. Officer had to adjudicate the amount only after hearing the parties and affording adequate opportunity of filing reply and substantial compliance of principles of natural justice. Petitioner was directed to appear before Assistant Director on 5-10-2020, on which date the petitioner shall file additional material and thereafter, Assistant Director shall pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.
REFERRED : Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd v. CIT 2007(8) SCC 463 : 2007 TaxPub(DT) 1452 (SC) and Nai Rajdhani Path Pramandal v. CIT (TDS) 2016 TaxPub(DT) 1739 (Pat-HC).
FAVOUR : Directions issued.
A.Y. :
SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|