SRI. SINGONAHALLI CHIKKAREVANNA GANGADHARAIAH,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(2)(1), BENGALURU
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 785/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2020AY 2014-15
Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm
For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 194CSection 194C(3)Section 201Section 28Section 30Section 40
…tax. According to him, it has for long been the legal position that if the payee has paid tax on his income, no recovery of any tax can be made from the person who had failed to deduct the income tax at source from such amount. In Grindlays Bank v CIT, (1992) 193 ITR 457 (Cal) decided on September 5, 1989, it was held by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court as follows at pages 469-470 of the reports: “A point has been made by the assessee that as a result of this deduction the department is realizing the tax twice on the same income. It does not appear that this point was agitated before the Tribunal. We, however, mak…