Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7572 (ITAT-DELHI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
4 year(s) 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
29-04-2024
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
F
Next Hearing Date
14-04-2024
Assessment Year
2012-2013
Appeal Filed On
09-01-2020
Judgement Text
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.209 /Del/2020 Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Vodafone Idea Limited (formerly Idea Cellular Ltd.) A-19, Mohan Co-Operative Industrial Estate, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi – 110 044 PAN AAACB2100P Vs. ACIT, Circle-50(1), New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM The appeal is against order dated 08.11.2019 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi upholding order dated 21.03.2014 of the Assessing Officer, ACIT, Circle- 50(1), New Delhi (in short “the AO”) under section 201(1)/201(1A) of Income Tax-Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for F.Y. 2011-12/2012-13. Assessee by: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Advocate Department by: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 15.04.2024 Date of pronouncement: 30.04.2024 2 2. Brief facts of case are that assessee is engaged in business of providing cellular mobile telephone services in the state of New Delhi (Delhi Circle). A survey under section 133A of the Income Tax Act was carried out on 17.01.2011 to verify as to whether idea Cellular Ltd. does discharge the TDS liability on account of payments covered under various TDS related provisions of the Act, especially considering the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in its own case, on the issue of treating the cash discounts on pre-paid and postpaid sales as commission covered under section 194H and also the treatment on account of payment towards IUC/Roaming charges covered under section 194J of the Act. The statement of Shri Anil Mittal was subsequently recorded on oath. As a matter of TDS compliance verification under section 201(1)/201(1A) of Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2011-12 a notice dated 11.4.2013 and a fresh notice dated 13.12.2013 were issued to the Idea Cellular Ltd. In response to these notices, Shri Anil Mittal, DGM Finance of the assessee appeared and filed the details called for from time to time. The case was discussed with him. 3 3. The computation of the assessee company for liability under the provisions of TDS compliance u/s 201(1)/201(1A) is computed as under- S. No. Particulars Default u/s 201(1) on non-payment. Interest u/s 201(1A) of Delay in Non Payment of TDS Total F.Y. 2011-12 1. Tax Liability u/s 194H 1,59,58,112/- 59,27,035/- 2,18,85,147/- 2. Tax Liability u/s 194J NIL 1,05,305/- 1,05,305/- Total 1,59,58,112/- 60,32,340/- 2,19,90,452/- Less Prepaid(Verified from the system) NIL NIL NIL Balance Tax liability 1,59,58,112/- 60,32,340/- 2,19,90,452/- 4. Being aggrieved appellant assessee preferred appeal before Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which was dismissed vide order dated 8.11.2019. 5. In the present appeal Learned AR submitted that Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding order of ACIT (TDS) treating appellant as an assessee in default under section 201r.w.s 194H of the Act despite of the fact that the TDS Officer failed to give a finding that the recipient had not paid taxes or discharged its liability. Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding order of TDS Officer that the relationship between the appellant and its distributors is that of Principal and Agent. 4 Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding order of TDS treating appellant as assessee in default under section 201 of the Act. Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding TDS officer levying interest under section 201(1A) on the ground that appellant has not deducted tax under section 194H. Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Bharti Cellular Limited vs ACIT has held as under:- “42. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold that the assessees would not be under a legal obligation to deduct tax at source on the income/profit component in the payments received by the distributors/franchisees from the third parties/customers, or while selling/transferring the pre-paid coupons or starter-kits to the distributors. Section 194-H of the Act is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case.” 6. Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Vodafone Idea Limited vs ACIT decided in appeal No.446/2019 is in above terms. 7. Learned DR submitted that order of Commissioner of Income Tax is legal. 8. From examination of record in light of aforesaid pleadings and submissions in view of above it is crystal clear that Learned CIT(A) vide order dated 8.11.2019 upheld order of Learned AO imposing of tax liability under section 201 r.w. s 194H&J. As per 5 ratio of judgment in Bharti Cellular Ltd.’s case (supra), it is well settled that assessee would not be under a legal obligation to deduct tax at source on the income/profit component in the payments received by the distributors/franchisees from the third parties/customers, or while selling/transferring the pre-paid coupons or starter-kits to the distributors. Section 194-H of the Act is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case. In view of the above material facts and circumstances and well settled principle of law impugned orders dated 8.11.2019 and 21.03.2014 are unsustainable and liable to be set aside. 9. No other points were argued. 10. Hence the appeal is allowed. Both the impugned orders dated 8.11.2019 and 21.03.2014 are set aside. Order pronounced in the open court on 30 th April, 2024. sd/- sd/- (S RIFAUR RAHMAN) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 30/04/2024 Veena Copy forwarded to - 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT 6 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi Date of dictation Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating Member Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other Member Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order Date of dispatch of the Order
