ITO (TDS) 3(2), MUMBAI V. SAI PROVISO DEVELOPERS, NAVI MUMBAI

ITA 1748/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 100729 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 13-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MAHAPATRA
• Section: 11

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI N.K . BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND RAM L AL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER / I .T.A. NO S . 1748 & 1749/MUM/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2010 - 11 & 2011 - 12 THE ITO (TDS) 3(2), SMT. K.G. MITTAL AYURVEDIC HOSPITAL BLDG., CHARNI ROAD (W), MUMBAI - 400 002 / VS. M/S. SAI PROVISO DEVELOPERS, 1201/1301, BHUMIRAJ COSTARICA, PLOT NO. 1 & 2, NEAR MORAJ RESIDENCY, PALM BEACH ROAD, SECTOR 18, SANPADA, NAVI MUMBAI - 400 705 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAQFS 4084A ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: SHRI S.K. MAHAPATRA / RESPONDENT BY: SHRI PRAKASH PANDIT / DATE OF HEARING : 0 2 .0 9 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 0 2 .0 9 .2015 / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: TH ESE APPEAL S BY THE REVENUE ARE PREFERRED AGAINST THE VERY SAME ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 13 , MUMBAI DT. 24.12.2013 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR S 20 1 0 - 11 & 2011 - 12 . SINCE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS DECIDED THESE APPEALS BY A COMMON ORDER, BOTH THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. ITA. NO S . 1748 & 1749/M/2014 2 2. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IN BOTH THE YEARS ARE COMMON AND IT RELATES TO THE DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A) HOLDING THAT THE AMOUNT PAID BY THE LESSEE I.E. ASSESSEE TO THE LESSOR I.E. CIDCO WAS NOT I N THE NATURE OF RENT AND THEREFORE NO TAX WAS DEDUCTIBLE U/S. 194 - I OF THE ACT AND THEREFORE THERE IS NO CASE FOR LEVYING INTEREST U/S. 201(1A) OF THE ACT. 3. AT THE VERY OUTSET, IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT THIS ISSUE IS NO MORE RES INTEGRA AS IT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. RELEVANT DECISIONS HAVE BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL BROUGHT ON RECORD. THE ISSUE RELATES TO THE PAYMENT OF LEASE PREMIUM BY THE ASSESSEE TO CIDCO. ACCORDING TO THE AO, THE ASSESSEE OUGHT TO HAVE DEDUCTED TAX AT S OURCE U/S. 194 - I OF THE ACT. AN IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH IN THE CASE OF ITO V S WADHWA & ASSOCIATES REALTORS (P) LTD 146 ITD 694, DCIT VS PARADISE INFRA - CON PVT. LTD. IN ITA NO. 4592/M/2012, TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH IN THE CASE OF ITO VS SPACE PROPERTIES IN ITA NO. 9/PN/2014, TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH IN THE CASE OF NAVI MUMBAI SEZ (P) LTD 147 ITD 261, DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF ITO VS INDIAN NEWSPAPERS SOCIETY 144 ITD 668 AND THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY IN THE CASE OF CIT VS KHIMLINE PUMPS LTD 258 ITR 459. UNDOUBTEDLY, THIS ISSUE IS NO MORE RES INTEGRA . CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE JUDICIAL DECISIONS REFERRED TO HEREINABOVE VIS - A - VIS PROVISIONS OF SEC. 194 - I, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON FOR THE APPLICABILITY OF THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 194 - I OF ITA. NO S . 1748 & 1749/M/2014 3 THE ACT. WE, THEREFORE DECLINE TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A). 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND SEPTEMBER , 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( RAM L AL NEGI ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 2 ND SEPTEMBER , 2015 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI