Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

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