Delhi High Court Gives Relief to Taxpayer by Deleting 20% Deposit Condition in TDS Issue:

Delhi High Court Gives Relief to Taxpayer by Deleting 20% Deposit Condition in TDS Issue

The Delhi High Court noted that the ITAT had already held that the petitioner was not required to deduct TDS in such a situation, and such a finding should have been considered by the AO.

Delhi High Deletes 20% Deposit Condition in TDS Issue

authorNidhidateMar 15, 2026
Last update on Mar 15, 2026
Delhi High Court Gives Relief to Taxpayer by Deleting 20% Deposit Condition in TDS Issue The Delhi High Court has set aside an order that required the assessee to deposit 20% of the tax demand as a condition for granting a stay during the appeal process. The tax department had earlier passed an order against the petitioner, treating the company as an "assessee in default" for allegedly not deducting TDS on certain payments. Therefore, the department issued a tax order raising a demand and interest under Section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act.
Delhi High Court Quashes Draft Order Issued by AO Due to Communication Gap
The petitioner argued that in its own case for assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-2020, the petitioner was not held to be in default. Further, in its own case for the very same assessment year, the tribunal has held that the assessee was not required to deduct TDS. The appellate authority had disposed of the stay application filed by the assessee but imposed a condition that the petitioner must deposit 20% of the total outstanding demand for the remaining demand to remain stayed. The petitioner approached the Delhi High Court, arguing that the authorities ignored the ITAT's ruling and earlier orders that had already held the petitioner not to be in default. The Delhi High Court noted that the ITAT had already held that the petitioner was not required to deduct TDS in such a situation, and such a finding should have been considered by the AO.
Delhi High Court Upholds Relief to Woman in IGI Gold Seizure Case; Customs Plea Dismissed
Therefore, the High Court ruled that the petitioner could not be forced to deposit 20% of the demand. It therefore quashed the orders dated and granted a full stay on the tax demand during the pendency of the appeal.

About Author

Nidhi

Content Writer

Nidhi is a skilled content writer specializing in personal finance. She creates clear, engaging articles on mutual funds, investments, insurance, and wealth-building strategies. With a passion for simplifying complex financial topics, Nidhi helps readers make informed money decisions with confidence. She can be reached at [email protected]
Studycafe
New Delhi, Delhi, India
1833
Up Next

Loading suggestions…