Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras High Court

Delhi High Court Sets Aside TDS Deduction Order for E-Commerce Firm, Citing ‘Mechanical’ Issuance and Lack of Reasoning

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling on November 7, 2023, the Delhi High Court has quashed an order by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax concerning the rate of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) applicable to Shreyash Retail Private Ltd., an e-commerce retail company. The court’s decision pointed out a crucial lapse in the administrative process, emphasizing that the order was “mechanically” issued without due application of mind.

The bench, led by Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, criticized the respondent, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax TDS Circle 77(1), for issuing a certificate allowing a TDS deduction at 0.5% instead of the 0.01% sought by the petitioner. The court’s observation was stark: “We find that the reasons furnished by the Respondent No. 1 qua the Application i.e., as to why the Petitioners’ request that TDS should not be deducted at a rate of 0.01% (zero point zero one per cent), hinges on broad generalizations…and accordingly has been issued mechanically reflecting non-application of mind.”

The ruling scrutinized the non-speaking nature of the impugned order and asserted that a lack of proper reasoning does not stand up to judicial scrutiny, a principle supported by precedent from the apex court.

The court’s intervention has set a precedent for the Income Tax Department to adhere to procedural rigour and provide adequate reasoning in its orders, especially when deviating from requests made by taxpayers.

The order has been remanded back to the respondent for a fresh, expedited determination in accordance with the law. This decision underscores the judiciary’s role in ensuring that statutory bodies do not overstep their bounds and maintain transparency and fairness in their administrative actions.

Date of Decision: 07.11.2023

SHREYASH RETAIL PRIVATE LTD VS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX  TDS CIRCLE

Latest Legal News