ACIT (TDS), Noida V. M/s. G.L. Bajaj Institute of Technology & Management, Greater Noida

ITA 306/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2840 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 06-01-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 16-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROBIN RAWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SAUBHAGYA AGARWAL
• Keywords: Tax effect
• Section: 194C; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 306/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 ACIT (TDS), VS. M/S GL BAJAJ INSTITUTE 5 TH FLOOR, A-2D, SECTOR-24 OF TECHNOLOGY & NOIDA MANAGEMENT (PROP. RAJEEV MEMORIAL ACADEMIC WELFARE SOCIETY), PLOT NO. 2, KNOWLEDGE PARK-3, GREATER NOIDA-201303 (PAN: AABTR2755C) ( APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. ROBIN RAWAL, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SH. SAUBHAGYA AGARWAL, ADV . DATE OF HEARING : 08-1-2016 DATE OF ORDER : 08-1-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 14.10.2013 OF LD. CIT(A), NOIDA PERTAINING TO ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS I N DELETING THE DEMAND RAISED BY AO ON ACCOUNT OF SHORT DEDUCTION AS WELL AS INTEREST CHARGED THEREON BY FOLLOWING THE ORDERS OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF M/S KOTHARI INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL IN ITA NO. 5886/DEI/2010 DATED 13.01.2012 AND APEEJAY SCHOOL IN ITA NO. 5887 & 5888/DEL/2010 DATE D 01.03.2011, IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT ACCEP TED THE SAID DECISIONS OF THE LD. ITAT AND FURTHER APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY T HE DEPARTMENT IN THE HIGH COURT. 2. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE DEMAND OF SHORT CHARGE AND INTEREST THEREON AND IN DIRECTING THAT PROVISIONS CONTAINED ITA NO. 306/DEL/2014 2 IN SECTION 194C IS APPLICABLE ON THE PAYMENT MADE B Y ASSESSEE FOR HIRING OF VEHICLES, IGNORING THE FACT OF THE CASE THAT THE DE DUCTOR COMPANY IS LIABLE TO DEDUCT THE TAX U/S 194-1 AT THE RATE OF 10% FOR HIR ING OF TAXIES IN VIEW OF AMI- NDMENT MADE U/S 194-1 W.E.F, 01.06.2017. 3. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELE TING THE DEMAND OF SHORT CHARGE AND INTEREST THEN ON WITHOUT APPRECIATING TH E FACT THAT THE HIRED VEHICLES WERE COVERED UNDER THE DEFINITION OF PLANT AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43(3) AND ACCORDINGLY THE TDS WAS DEDUCTIBL E AS PER PROVISION OF SECTION 194-I AT THE PRESCRIBED RATE, INSTEAD OF SE CTION 194C AS HELD BY LD. CIT(A) AFTER THE INSERTION OF AMENDED PROVISIONS IN THE SECTION 194-1 W.E.F, 13.07.2006. 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. FROM THE ABOVE, WE FIND THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THE REVENUES APPEAL IS LESS THAN RS.10,00,000/-, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, IN VIEW OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015 ISSUED VIDE F.NO. 279/MISC. 142/2007-ITJ (PT.) BY THE CBDT. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE RELEVANT PARA NOS. 3 & 10 OF THE AFORESAID CBDTS C IRCULAR ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 3. HENCEFORTH, APPEALS/ SLPS SHALL NOT BE FILED IN CASES WHERE THE TAX EFFECT DOES NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY L IMITS GIVEN HEREUNDER: S NO APPEALS IN INCOME-TAX MATTERS MONETARY LIMIT (IN RS) 1 BEFORE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 10,00,000/- 2 BEFORE HIGH COURT 20,00,000/- 3 BEFORE SUPREME COURT 25,00,000/- IT IS CLARIFIED THAT AN APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE FILED MERELY BECAUSE THE TAX EFFECT IN A CASE EXCEEDS THE MONETA RY LIMITS PRESCRIBED ABOVE. FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH CASES IS TO BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. ITA NO. 306/DEL/2014 3 10. THIS INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN HIGH COURTS/ TRIBUNALS. PENDING APPEALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED TAX LIMITS IN PARA 3 ABOVE MAY BE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED. APPEALS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE INSTRUCTI ONS ON THIS SUBJECT, OPERATIVE AT THE TIME WHEN SUCH APPEA L WAS FILED. 3. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE BOARDS INSTRUCTIO N OR DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES ARE BINDING ON THOSE AUTHORI TIES, THEREFORE, THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD HAVE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE P RESENT APPEAL, IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID INSTRUCTIONS SINCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS LESS THAN THE AMOUNT OF RS. 10 LACS, PRESCRIBED IN THE ABOVE SAID CBDTS INSTRUCTIONS. 4. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 21/2015 DATED 10 TH DECEMBER, 2015, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD HA VE WITHDRAWN/ NOT PRESSED THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WE ARE ALS O OF THE VIEW THAT THE SAID INSTRUCTIONS ARE APPLICABLE FOR THE PENDING APPEALS AND APPEALS TO BE FILED HENCEFORTH IN TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STAN DS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08/1/2016. SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER DATED: 08/1/2016 *SR BHATNAGAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITA NO. 306/DEL/2014 4