ITO TDS 3(3), MUMBAI V. SINGAPORE AIRLINES LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3914/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9023 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 201(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH E,MUM BAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.3914/MUM/2014 FOR (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 ) ITA NO.3915/MUM/2014 FOR (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 ) ITO TDS-3(3), 1009, 10 TH FLOOR, SMT. K.G. MITAL AYURVEDIC HOSPITAL BUILDING, CHARNI ROAD (W), MUMBAI-400002 VS. M/S. SINGAPORE AIRLINES PVT. LTD., TAJMAHAL INTERNATIONAL, APOLLO BUNDER, MUMBAI-400039 PAN: AADCS5269A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : MS. BEENA SANTOSH(DR ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K.K. VED & MS. U.A. MEHTA (AR) DATE OF HEARING : 10.01.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10 .01.2017 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1) OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JM: 1. THESE TWO APPEALS BY REVENUE UNDER SECTION 253 OF T HE INCOME TAX ACT(ACT) ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) [FOR SHORT THE CIT(A)] 14, MUMBAI DATED 13.03.200 4 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR (AYS) 2009-10 & 2010-11. AS FACTS AS WELL GROUNDS OF APPE AL IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL, IMPUGNED ORDER IS COMMON, THUS BOTH WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE DECIDED BY A CONSOLIDATED ORDER. FOR APPRECIATION OF FACTS, WE ARE REFERRING THE FACTS OF AY 2009-10. 2. THOUGH THE REVENUE HAS RAISED A NUMBER OF GROUNDS B UT AS PER OUR CONSIDRED OPINION THE ONLY SUBSTANTIAL GROUND IS WHETHER LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE INTEREST U/S 201(1A) OF THE IT ACT ON THE BASIS THA T QUANTUM ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT FURTHER APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED TO ITAT AGAINST THE DELETION OF QUANTUM ADDITION. 2 ITA NOS. 3914 & 3915 /M/2014 M/S. SINGAPORE AIRLINES PVT. LTD. 3. WE HAVE HEARD LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR) FOR THE REVENUE AND LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (AR) FOR ASSESSEE. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER U/S 201(1) ON THE BASIS OF WHICH, THE ORDER U/S201(1A) DATED 08.06.2012 WAS PASSED, HAS ALREADY BEEN SET-ASIDE BY CIT(A) AND THE SAME HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE ITAT MUMBAI VIDE ORDER DATED 19.12.2016 IN ITA NOS. 3148 & 3139/MUM/2014 FOR AY 2009-10 & 2010 -11 RESPECTIVELY, HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE WILL NOT SURVIVE . THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE NOT DISPUTED THE FACTS. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTION OF THE PART IES AND SEEN THAT IN ITA NO. 3148 & 3139/MUM/2014 FOR AY 2009-10 & 2010-11, THE REVEN UE CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF CIT(A) DATED 12.02.2014, WHEREIN THE ORDER U/S 2 01(1) PASSED BY AO WAS SET- ASIDE. THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL PASSE D THE FOLLOWING ORDER: 8. GROUND NO.2 RELATES TO THE SHORT DEDUCTION OF TD S ON PASSENGER SERVICE FEES (PSF). THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE ARGUED THAT THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALSO COVERED IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF HO NBLE SUPREME COURT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE WHICH WAS DECIDED ALONG WITH TH E CASE OF JAPAN AIRLINES COMPANY VS. CIT, REPORTED VIZ 377 ITR 372 (SC). THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE NOT DISPUTED ABOUT THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL POSITION. 9. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF HONBLE APEX COURT IN JAPAN AIRLINES CO(SUPRA) AND SEEN THAT THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS A LSO SQUARELY COVERED BY THIS DECISION, WHEREIN THE HONBLE APEX COURT HELD THAT THE CHARGES PAID BY INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES TO AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDI A FOR LANDING AND TAKEOFF SERVICES AS WELL AS FOR PARKING OF AIRCRAFT, ARE NO T, IN SUBSTANCE FOR USE OF LAND BUT FOR VARIOUS OTHER FACILITIES EXTENDED BY AIRPORT AU THORITY OF INDIA IN CONNECTION OF AIRPORT OPERATION AND SUCH CHARGES ARE NOT COVERED U/S 194I OF THE ACT. THUS THIS GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS NO FORC E AND THE SAME IS DISMISSED BY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE APEX COURT. 10. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. 5. CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH OF THI S TRIBUNAL DATED 19.12.2016, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY REVENUE IN BOTH THE APP EALS HAVE BECOME INFRUCTUOUS. THUS, THE SAME ARE DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE REVENUE FOR BOTH THE AYS ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 10 TH JANUARY, 2017. SD/- SD/- (RAJENDRA) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED 10/01/2017 3 ITA NOS. 3914 & 3915 /M/2014 M/S. SINGAPORE AIRLINES PVT. LTD. S.K.PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, (ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY/