ACIT, Panchkula V. M/s Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd., Panchkula

ITA 452/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 90238 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 09-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 28-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR AMA RVEER SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: HARISH NAYYAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 452/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 THE ACIT, VS UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI PANCHKULA CIRCLE, VITRAN NIGAM LTD., PANCHKULA. SECTOR 6, PANCHKULA. PAN: AAACU4562G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : DR.AMARVEER SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI HARISH NAYYAR DATE OF HEARING : 09.07.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.07.2015 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM THIS APPEAL BY REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDE R OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) PANCHKULA DATED 14.02.2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF L D. CIT(APPEALS) IN DELETING DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 371,52,15,673/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT ON ACCOUNT OF NON DEDUCTION OF TDS FROM WHEELING CHARGES IGNORING T HE FACT THAT ASSESSEE FAILED TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE ON THE PAYMENT OF WHEELING CHARGES. 2 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS A DISTRIBUTOR OF ELECTRICITY TO THE CONSUMERS IN NORT HERN HARYANA. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED WHEELING CHARGES TO HVPNL AMOUNTING TO RS . 371.52 CRORES. IT WAS OBSERVED THAT NO TDS WAS DED UCTED ON THIS AMOUNT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED FOR TH E EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WHY THIS AMOUNT SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOWED ON ACCOUNT OF NON DEDUCTION OF TDS UN DER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICE R AFTER CONSIDERING SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE, MADE THE DISALLOWANCE. 3. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) T HAT IT HAS ALREADY BEEN HELD THAT WHEELING CHARGES AR E NOT SUBJECTS TO TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE, THEREFORE, ADD ITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 40(A)(I A) OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF NON DEDUCTION OF TDS ON WHEEL ING CHARGES DESERVES TO BE DELETED. THE LD. CIT(APPEAL S) FOUND THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN ASSESSEE'S OWN C ASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, 2007-08 AND 2008-09 DATED 04.11.2009 DECIDED BY HIM. HE HAS REPRODUCED THE E NTIRE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOR THESE YEARS AND D ELETED THE ADDITION. 4. THE LD. DR RELIED UPON ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER, ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REI TERATED SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND SUBMIT TED THAT ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DATED 04.11.2009 FOR EARLIER YEAR WHICH IS FOLLOWED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEA LS) HAS 3 BEEN UPHELD BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 28.05. 2010, COPY OF THE ORDER IS PLACED ON RECORD. 5. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS IN THE LIGHT OF THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) DATED 04.11.2009 WHICH IS FOLLO WED BY LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOR EARLIER YEARS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DELETING THE ADDITION, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL BECAUSE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DATED 04.11.2009 IS ULTIMATELY CONFIRM ED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 28.05.2010 IN WHICH I T WAS HELD THAT ASSESSEE WAS NOT REQUIRED TO DEDUCT TAX A T SOURCE IN RESPECT OF THE PAYMENTS BY WAY OF WHEELIN G CHARGES AND SLDC CHARGES. THE ISSUE IS THEREFORE, COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THUS, DEPARTMEN TAL APPEAL HAS NO MERIT. THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY, DISM ISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH JULY,2015. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 15 TH JULY,2015. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH