Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« General »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Won case against income tax department but still waiting for benefit? No more delay after an update in ITR portal
 Income Tax Department regrets issuing erroneous notices to taxpayers: Know the details
 Income Tax Return: Miss THIS ITR filing deadline and you will be fined Rs 10000
 Tax contribution of petroleum sector set to drop rapidly in FY 2024-25
 Missed reporting foreign assets in ITR? File revised return to avoid Rs 10 lakh penalty
 Tax regime shift: Is filing ITR under old regime still valid after default new regime?
 Income Tax Department Targets Bogus Refund Claims, Issues Notices To Taxpayers
 IT firms bullish on higher spending due to tax cuts
 How to calculate capital gains tax on sale of land?
 Don't fall for fake notices! How to verify your income tax communication
 I decided to shift to the new tax regime. Will I lose benefit on interest income of my PPF account?

UCO Bank moves court against Income Tax fine
May, 09th 2011

The United Commercial Bank has moved the Delhi High Court challenging an Income Tax notice that slapped a penalty of over Rs 54 lakh on its branch for not making tax deduction at source on a fixed deposit account worth Rs 7.7 crore opened by the HC.

A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Sanjiv Khanna, before whom the bank's plea came up for hearing recently, has referred the matter to a larger bench and fixed July 15 for further hearing.

The bank approached the court following the I-T department's March 29 order that the high court branch of UCO Bank was liable to pay more than Rs 54 lakh for violation of Income Tax act for not deducting TDS amount on the interests generated on a Fixed Deposit Receipt of more than Rs 7.7 crore.

The department has issued notice to the bank for its failure to deduct tax on the interest received by the court's Registrar General (RG).

Filing a petition through its standing Counsel Sarfaraz Khan, the bank submitted that the RG is only the custodian of the deposited amount but not the beneficiary and the act would not apply on it.

While hearing various litigations, the court had directed the litigants to deposit the disputed amount with the RG till the final disposal of the case and the RG had deposited them in the bank in the form of FDRs.

In the petition, UCO's counsel sought the court's intervention as the bank has got thousands of FDRs from the court and the department could issue large number of similar notices.

In September 2004, the court had passed an interim order in the case of Union of India versus Oriental Building Furnishing Company Ltd. And directed the government to deposit Rs 7,07,45,550 by way of an FDR in the name of Registrar General, the Delhi High Court.

Urging the court to quash the March 29 order of the I-T department to pay the penalty, the bank said, "Declare that the non-deduction of tax at source from the deposits made by the bank in the name of RG, Delhi High Court under the interim directions is not violative of Income Tax act".

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2025 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting