9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment involves issues related to the jurisdiction of the Income Tax Officer (ITO) u/s 201 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, powers of the ITO to determine chargeable income u/s 206, correctness of interest chargeable u/s 201(1A), and liability of the employer to deduct income tax. Jurisdiction of ITO u/s 201: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal referred questions regarding the jurisdiction of the ITO, Salaries Circle (TDS), Bhopal, u/s 201 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal held that the ITO had jurisdiction to proceed against the assessee under s. 201 of the Act. It was established that if the salary income of any employee was not correctly estimated by the employer, the ITO could demand additional tax from the employer under the provisions of s. 201 of the Act. Powers of ITO u/s 206: The Tribunal also considered the powers of the ITO, Salaries Circle (TDS), Bhopal, to adjudicate and determine the correctness of the estimated chargeable income of each employee for whom the return was filed u/s 206 of the Act. The Tribunal upheld the ITO's authority to demand extra tax and interest under s. 201(1A) from the assessee based on recomputed chargeable income of employees. Correctness of Interest u/s 201(1A): Regarding the correctness of interest chargeable u/s 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, the Tribunal found that interest was correctly leviable in the circumstances of the case. The Tribunal upheld the order of the ITO, Salaries Circle (TDS), Bhopal, directing to charge interest u/s 201(1A) based on recomputation of chargeable income of employees. Liability of Employer to Deduct Income Tax: The liability of an employer to deduct income tax on the amount of salary payable to employees was analyzed. The Tribunal clarified that the employer's obligation is to deduct tax on the estimated income of the employee, and to pay the sum deducted to the Central Govt. within the prescribed time. The Tribunal emphasized that unless it is found that the estimate made by the employer was incorrect due to dishonesty or unfairness, the employer cannot be held as an assessee in default u/s 201(1) of the Act. Conclusion: The High Court upheld the Tribunal's findings on the jurisdiction of the ITO u/s 201, powers of the ITO u/s 206, correctness of interest u/s 201(1A), and the liability of the employer to deduct income tax. The Court ruled against the Department on the questions referred, emphasizing the importance of fair and honest estimation by the employer in fulfilling tax obligations under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
|
