The ITO, TDS-1, RAJKOT-GUJARAT V. Saurashtra Cricket Association, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

ITA 426/RJT/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1118 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 26-05-2015
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AVINASH KUMAR
• Section: 194C; 201(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH , RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI SHAILEND RA K UMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI N. S. SAINI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . ITA. NO S . 426, 427 & 428 / RJT /20 1 4 (ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 200 1 - 0 2, 2003 - 04 & 200 4 - 0 5 ) INCOM E - T AX OFFICER, T DS - 1 , RAJKOT APPELLANT VS. SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, 7 TH FLOOR, PRASHAM , NR. DHARAM CINEMA, RAJKOT RESPONDENT PAN: AAAAS2360J / BY REVENUE : SHRI AVINASH KUMAR, D.R . / BY ASSESSEE : NONE /DATE OF HEARING : 26 .0 5 .2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28 .0 5 .2015 ORDER PER BENCH THESE T HREE APPEALS FILED BY REVENUE PERTAIN TO SAME ASSESSEE ARE ARISING OUT FORM THE ORDER S OF CIT(A) - II , RAJKOT , DATED 28 .0 4.2014 ON SAME ISSUE FOR ALL THREE YEARS . SO, THEY I T A NO S . 426, 427 & 428 /RJT/1 4 A.YS. 01 - 02, 03 - 04 & 04 - 05 [ ITO, TDS - 1 V S . SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION ] PAGE 2 ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY WAY OF THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. IN ITA NO. 426 / RJT /20 1 4 , REVENUE HAS FILED THE APPEAL ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND S : 1. THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS FACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ORDER PASSED U/S . 201 (1) OF RS . 22 , 44 0/ - AND INTEREST CHARGED UNDER SECTION 201 (1 A) OF THE IT ACT OF RS . 3 4 , 16 5 RESPECTIVE LY. 2. THE LD . CIT (A) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN APPRECIATING THAT THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT PAID BY THE ASSESSEE TO BCCI WAS A CONTRACTUAL PAYMENT AS DEFINED IN SECTION 194C OF THE ACT. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) O UGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. SIMILAR GROUND S HA VE BEEN RAISED BY REVENUE IN A.Y.200 3 - 0 4 AND 2004 - 05. 3 . ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED THE ORDER LEVYING PENALTY U/S. 201(1) & 201(1A) OF THE ACT. MATTER WAS CARRIED BEFORE THE FI RST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, WHEREIN VARIOUS CONTENTIONS WERE RAISED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE AND HAVING CONSIDERED THE SAME, CIT(A) HAS GRANTED RELIEF TO ASSESSEE. 3 . 1 SAME HAS BEEN OPPOSED BEFORE US ON BEHALF OF REVENUE INTER ALIA SUBMITTING THAT CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING ORDER PASSED U/S.201(1) OF RS.22,440/ - AND INTEREST CHARGED U/S. 201(1A) OF THE ACT OF RS.34,165/ - RESPECTIVELY. ACCORDINGLY, ORDER OF CIT(A) BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF ASSESSING I T A NO S . 426, 427 & 428 /RJT/1 4 A.YS. 01 - 02, 03 - 04 & 04 - 05 [ ITO, TDS - 1 V S . SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION ] PAGE 3 OFFICER ON THE ISSUE BE RESTORED. ON OTHER HAND, NON E APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE, SO MATTER IS BEING DECIDED EX PARTE ON THE BASIS OF ARGUMENT OF LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND MATERIAL ON RECORD. 3.2 . AFTER GOING THROUGH RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT IN CASE BEFORE US PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE BY SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION TO BCCI A S GUARANTEE MONEY FOR CONDUCT OF MATCH ALLOTTED TO SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION B Y B CCI. T HIS IS NOT A PAYMENT MADE BY SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION TO BCCI FOR CARRYING OU T ANY WORK IN PURSUANCE OF A CONTRACT. THE GUARANTEE MONEY IS AS EXPLAINED BY ASSESSEE FOR ESTABLISHMENT EXPENSES AND EXPENSES INCURRED FOR HOTEL AND TRAVELLING ETC. OF VISITING AND HOME TEAMS. I N CASE , SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION FAILS TO CONDUCT THE MATCH, THE GUA RANTEE MONEY WOULD HAVE BEEN FORFEITED BY BCCI . THUS, THE PAYMENT MADE BY SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATI ON TO B CC I WA S BEYOND THE AMBIT OF SECTION 194C . THE PAYMENT MADE TO BCC I WA S NOT FOR CARRYING OUT ANY WORKS IN PURSUANCE OF A CONTRACT AS BCCI IS NOT DOI NG ANY WORK . SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION WAS CONDUCTING THE MATCHES. BCCI WA S ONLY AN ALLOTTING BODY AND ACTUAL EXECUTION OF MATCH WA S IN THE HANDS OF SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION. AS STATED ABOVE, PAYMENT MADE TO BCCI WA S NOT IN PURSUANCE OF A CONT RACT FOR WORKS AND NOT COVERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C. THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO LIABILITY TO DEDUCT TAX BY SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION ON GUARANTEE MONEY PAID TO I T A NO S . 426, 427 & 428 /RJT/1 4 A.YS. 01 - 02, 03 - 04 & 04 - 05 [ ITO, TDS - 1 V S . SAURASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION ] PAGE 4 BCCI. ACCORDINGLY, CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE DEMAND IN QUESTION B ECA USE ASSESSEE WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR TDS, SO QUESTION OF LEVYING OF INTEREST U/S.201(1A) DOES NOT ARISE. ACCORDINGLY, CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN GRANTING RELIEF TO ASSESSEE. 4 . SIMILAR ISSUE AROSE IN ITA NOS. 427 & 428/RJT/2014 FOR A.Y. 03 - 04 AND 04 - 05 R ESPECTIVELY. FACTS BEING SIMILAR, SO FOLLOWING SAME REASONING, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE IN THE FINDING OF CIT(A) WHO HAS DELETED THE ORDER S PASSED U/S. 201(1) AND 201(1A) OF THE ACT ON RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS IN BOTH THE YEARS . SAME ARE UPHELD. 5 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL S FILED BY REVENUE FOR ALL THREE YEARS ARE DISMISSED . PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 28 TH DAY OF MA Y , 201 5 . SD/ - SD/ - (N. S. SAINI) (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICI AL MEMBER RAJKOT : DATED 28 /0 5 /2015 TRUE COPY S K SINHA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, RAJKOT 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, RAJKOT