M/s Johnson Watch Company Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 1719/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9633 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 11 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-03-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 22-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SOHAIL MALIK
• Assessee Lawyers: TILAK TALWAR
• Keywords: TDS; FORM 26AS
• Section: 40(a)(ia)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. K. N. CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) ITA NO. 1719/DEL/2017 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2012-13 M/S JOHNSON WATCH COMPANY PVT. LTD., L-21, CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI-110001 VS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-13(2), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A A BCJ9807G ASSESSEE BY : SH. TILAK TALWAR, ADV. REVENUE BY : SH. SOHAIL MALIK, SR. DR DATE OF HEAR ING: 24 . 02 .20 2 1 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12 .03 .20 2 1 ORDER PER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A)-32, NEW DELHI DATED 29.12. 2016. 2. HEARD AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. 3. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED RS.4,23,000 /- U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BEING THE INT EREST PAID TO THE FINANCE INSTITUTE NAMELY, BMW FINANCIAL SERVICE S AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DEDUCT TDS. 4. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID EMI TO THE FI NANCE INSTITUTE ON THE LOAN RAISED FOR PURCHASE OF VEHICL E AND THE EMIS INCLUDE THE PRINCIPLE AND INTEREST PRE-DECIDED AT T HE TIME OF OBTAINING THE LOAN WHICH IS TO BE REPAID OVER A PER IOD OF 3 TO 7 ITA NO. 1719/DEL/2017 JOHNSON WATCH COMPANY PVT. LTD. 2 YEARS AS PER THE INSTALLMENT PLAN. DURING THE HEARI NG, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE INTEREST PAID BY THE AS SESSEE HAS BEEN DULY ACCOUNTED BY THE PAYEE. HENCE, OWING TO T HE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF ANSAL LAND MARK TOWNSHIP PVT. LTD. (2015) 377 ITR 6 35 (DEL.), WE HOLD IN PRINCIPLE THAT NO DISALLOWANCE IS CALLED FOR IN SUCH SITUATION. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO SUBMIT THE C ERTIFICATE IN FORM 26AS TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CLAIM THE REL IEF. 5. REGARDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST ON LATE D EPOSIT OF TDS OF RS.6,515/-, SINCE, THE DECISION OF THE LD. C IT (A) IS BASED ON THE JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF CHENNAI PROPER TIES AND INVESTMENTS LTD. 105 TAXMANN 346 (MADRAS), WE DECLI NE TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A). 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12/03/2021. SD/- SD/- (K. N. CHARY) (D R. B. R. R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOU NTANT MEMBER DATED: 12/03/2021 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR