2 results for “TDS”+ Section 13(8)clear
Sorted by relevance
8. Counsel for respondent No.2, Mr. Sunish Bindlish, relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. versus Union of India 1997 (89) E.L.T. 247 (S.C.) to submit that if the amount has been deposited erroneously, the same is not liable to be refunded under Section 11B of the Act, 1944 and the State