ASST CIT (TDS) 2(2), MUMBAI V. ALLIED MEDIA NETWORK P. LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3874/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3351 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MORYA PRATAP
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRI
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES A, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI ( JM) ITA NO. 3874/MUM/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 THE A CIT, (TDS) - 2 ( 2 ) , ROOM NO. 703, 7 TH FLOOR, SMT. K.G. MITTAL AYURVEDIC HOSPITAL BUILDING, CHARNI ROAD, MUMBAI- 400002. VS. M/S. ALLIED MEDIA NETWORK P. LTD., P2, 2 ND FLOOR, PERCEPT HOUSE, 22 RAGHUVANSHI ESTATES, 11/12 SENAPATI BAPAT MARG, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI- 400013. PAN- AADCP9975H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI. MORYA PRATAP RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. PANKAJ JAIN. DATE OF HEARING: 02/06/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 02/06/2016 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAI NST ORDER DATED 05/03/2014 PASSED BY THE LD CIT(A)-14, MUMBAI FOR THE ASSESSME NT YEAR 2011-12. 2. THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE IMPUGNED ORDER O N FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- (I) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY SEARCH LIGHT MOVIES IS FAR BEYOND THE MERE SUPPLY OF LABOUR AND THE VER Y NATURE OF SERVICES RENDERED SUGGEST THAT THEY ARE TECHNICAL, AS ENVISAGED IN 2 ITA NO. 3874/MUM/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 THE EXPLANATION 2 TO SECTION 9(1)(VII) OF THE ACT A ND OUGHT TO BE SUBJECTED TO TDS U/S 194J OF THE ACT. (II). ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE INTEREST U/S 2 01(1A) OF THE IT ACT, 1961, AS INTEREST DELETION IS CONSEQUENTIAL TO THE QUANTUM DELETION FOR WHICH FURTHER APPEAL HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED VIDE GROUND NO.1. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS CASE IS BELOW 10,00,000/- HENCE, AS PER THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 21 OF 2015, DATED 10/12/2015, THE PRESENT APPEAL IS NOT M AINTAINABLE. 4. THE LD. DR FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THE TAX EFFECT I N DEPARTMENTS APPEAL IS BELOW 10 LAKHS, WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN AP PEAL DOES NOT FALL UNDER ANY OF THE EXCEPTIONS SPECIFIED IN PARA 8 OF THE CIRCU LAR. SINCE, IT HAS BEEN SPECIFICALLY CLARIFIED IN THE CIRCULAR AFORESAID TH AT THE INSTRUCTION WILL APPLY RETROSPECTIVELY TO ALL THE PENDING APPEALS; THE PRE SENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. WE, THEREFORE, DISMIS S THE SAME IN LIMINE . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND JUNE, 2016 SD/- SD/- ( R.C.SHARMA ) (RAM LAL NEGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED: 02/06/2016 3 ITA NO. 3874/MUM/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 / 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 PRAMILA