Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We find that Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by observing as under:

"The appellant has disclosed an income of Rs.1,26,54,690/- in her return, on which an amount of Rs.37,00,295/- was deducted at source by a company called M/s Zoom Developers P. Ltd. in which appellant is a director and that is a group company of appellant. It is now claimed by appellant that such company has deducted TDS from salary and hire charges but not paid the same to Govt. account. It is appellant's claim that if TDS was deducted by such company and was not paid in Government a/c, liability for such tax payment was now on the company. This could be a valid argument and the case laws referred by appellant, in this regard, would definitely apply in a case where appellant is a deductee& company as a third party is a deductor. That is not the case here, because here deductee as an individual is not an outsider, but is a director/promoter of deductee company and company being only a legal person & not a physical person, all its affairs are being run & controlled by its directors/promoters and through them by the employees. Hence if TDS of appellant was deducted by a company in which appellant was a director/promoter, the decision to pay or not to pay tax deducted in Government a/c was taken by appellant & that is why appellant cannot shrug the responsibility of nonpayment of such tax in Government a/c.