M/s Bharti Airtel Limited, Indore V. The ITO (TDS) -2, Indore

ITA 188/IND/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 18822714 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-09-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-04-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KESHAV SAXENA
• Assessee Lawyers: ALOK JAIN; SOUMITRA ROY
• Keywords: Question of law

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.188/IND/2012 A.Y. 2009-10 M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED INDORE PAN AAACB 2894G :: APPELLANT VS INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)-1, INDORE :: RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI ALOK JAIN AND SHRI SOUMITRA ROY RESPONDENT BY SHRI KESHAV SAXENA DATE OF HEARING 10.09.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 10.09.2012 2 O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 2 ND DECEMBER, 2011 PASSED BY THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, INDORE, ON THE GROUNDS AS DETA ILED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL WHICH ARE BROADLY WITH RESPEC T TO ORDER U/S 201(1), 201(1A) AND 194H OF THE ACT. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED CIT DR, SHRI KESHAV SAXENA, POINTED OUT THAT THE IMPUGNED ISSUES ARE COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT, THEREFORE, DEFENDED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE APEX COURT. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED APPLICATION U/S 158A(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT IN FO RM NO. 8 ON THE GROUND THAT IDENTICAL QUESTIONS ARE PE NDING IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE HONBLE APEX COURT U/S 261 IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 AND 2004-05. THE LEARNED COUNSEL HAS ALSO ANNEXED COPY OF 3 THE DECISIONS FROM HONBLE HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F BHARTI CELLULAR LIMITED (NOW BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED) ITA NO. 222 OF 2006 (HONBLE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA), P AGES 6 TO 25, GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT (PAGES 26 TO 65) AND QUESTION OF LAW (PAGES 1 TO 5) BY CLAIMING THAT THE QUESTION OF LAW IS IDENTICAL A RISING IN THE CASE OF BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E. 2009-10 WHICH IS PENDING BEFOR E THIS TRIBUNAL WITH AN UNDERTAKING AS CONTAINED IN P ARA 3 OF DECLARATION MADE U/S 158A(1) OF THE ACT. THE LE ARNED CIT DR HAS NO OBJECTION TO THIS APPLICATION. 3. ON PERUSAL OF RECORD AND AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ACCEPT THE DECLARATION OF THE ASSES SEE MADE U/S 158A(1) OF THE ACT ESPECIALLY WHEN IDENTIC AL QUESTION OF LAW IS PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE APEX COURT, TO AVOID REPETITIVE APPEALS IN THE CASE OF THE ASSE SSEE. HOWEVER, THE ISSUE AS ACCEPTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY HONBL E 4 DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF IDEAL CELLULAR LIMI TED. IN VIEW OF THE UNDERTAKING OF THE ASSESSEE IN PARA 3 OF APPLICATION U/S 158A(1) OF THE ACT, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE ISSUE IS PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT A ND HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS ALREADY DECIDED THE ISSUE AG AINST THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, ANY DECISION FROM THE HON BLE APEX COURT WILL BE BINDING ON BOTH THE PARTIES, THE REFORE, TO AVOID REPETITIVE APPEALS, THIS DECLARATION U/S 1 58A(1) OF THE ACT OF THE ASSESSEE IS ACCEPTED. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISPOSED OF IN TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 10 TH SEPTEMBER, 2012. SD SD (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SI NGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 10 TH SEPTEMBER, 2012 COPY TO: APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, GUARD FILE DN/-10.10 5