ACIT, Jaipur V. M/S NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, CHITTORGARH

ITA 521/JPR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 52123114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 30-11-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 26-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S L JAIN DHK
• Keywords: Maximum Marginal Rate; Non-deduction of tax; Assessment record

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 521 & 522/JP/2011 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 & 2008-09 THE ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), JAIPUR CUKE VS. M/S. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA PIU-EW-V 7A & B, RAM KAMAL ROAD, NO.5 BAPU NAGAR SENTHI, CHITTORGAR (RAJ.) LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: JDHNO 1998 D VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. NEENA JEPH, JCIT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.L. JAIN, ADVOCATE LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 12/05/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17/07/2015 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER T.R. MEENA, AM BOTH THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST TWO DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A)-II, JAIPUR DATE D 28-03-2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 & 2008-09 WHEREIN SIMILAR FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN BOTH THE APPEALS . 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE INTE REST CHARGED U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT BY HOLDING THAT TDS (DEDUCTED BY THE ASSESSEE AT LOWER RATE) WAS IN ANY CASE MORE THAN THE INCOME OF THE PAYEE AS THE PAYEE TOOK REFUNDS; WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE INTEREST WAS DEMANDED U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT TO COMPENSATE THE INTEREST, AS P ROVIDED BY ITA NO. 521/JP/2011 ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), JAIPUR .VS NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, CHITTORGARH . 2 THE LAW, LOST DUE TO THE VIOLATION/ FAILURE ON PART OF THE PAYER TO DEDUCT TDS AT THE MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE ORDER U/S 195(2) IS NOT A BLANKET CERTIFICATE STRET CHABLE BEYOND THE SPECIFIED AMOUNTS/ DATES. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT IF T HE PAYER HAD A BONA FIDE BELIEF THAT NO PART OF THE PAYMENT BEARS INCOME CHARACTER THEN IT IS NOT MANDATORY FOR THE P AYER TO UNDERGO THE PROCEDURE OF SECTION 195(2) BEFORE MAKI NG ANY PAYMENT TO THE NON-RESIDENT; WITHOUT APPRECIATING T HAT THE LAW DOES NOT PERMIT THE PAYER TO STEP INTO THE SHOE S OF THE AO TO SUO MOTO DECIDE AS TO WHETHER THE PAYMENT IN QUESTION BEARS INCOME CHARACTER OR NOT. 2.1 BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ADIT (INTE RNATIONAL TAXATION) VERIFIED THE TDS ON 24-02-2010 MADE BY THE ITO-TDS, UDAIPUR. DURING THE COURSE OF TDS VERIFICATION, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE SUBSTANTIAL PAYMENT TO A FOREIGN CONTRACTOR COMPANY M/S. CHINA GEZHOUBA WATER & POWER (GROUP) CO. LTD., NEW DELHI IN CONNECTION WITH THEIR ROAD CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. IT WAS FURTHE R NOTICED THAT M/S. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA (FOR SHORT NHA I) MADE PAYMENTS TO THE FOREIGN COMPANY AT LOWER RATES THAN THE APPL ICABLE RATES IN THE CASE OF THE FOREIGN COMPANIES. M/S. NHAI ALSO FAILED TO PROVIDE THE RELEVANT CERTIFICATE/ AUTHORIZATION FROM THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER OF THE FOREIGN COMPANY U/S 195/197 TO DEDUCT THE TDS AT A LESSER R ATE. THE ITO-TDS GAVE SHOWN CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS B EEN REPRODUCED BY ITA NO. 521/JP/2011 ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), JAIPUR .VS NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, CHITTORGARH . 3 ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) AT PAGE 1 AND 2 OF T HE ORDER. THE ASSESSEE ALSO AVAILED THE OPPORTUNITY. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTE D BEFORE HIM THAT HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S. HINDUSTA N COCO COLA BEVERAGE (P) LTD. VS. CIT (2007) 283 ITR 226 HELD C LEARLY HELD THAT:- TDS ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT TAX ALREADY PAID BY RECIPIENT OF INCOME PAYEE HAS ALREADY PAID TAXES DU E ON THE PAYMENT RECEIVED BY IT FROM THE ASSESSEE THEREFORE, TAX COULD NOT BE RECOVERED ONCE AGAIN FROM THE DEDUCTOR ASS ESSEE. THIS ISSUE STANDS CLARIFIED BY CIRCULAR NO. 275/201 /95-IT(B) DATED 29-01-1997. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT M/S. CHINA GEZHOUBA WA TER & POWER (GROUP) CO. LTD. NEW DELHI HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME F OR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2006-07 CLAIMING THE INCOME TAX REFUND OF RS. 83,93 ,465/- AND FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08 CLAIMING THE INCOME TAX REFU ND OF RS. 93,92,252/-. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISHED THE COPY OF RETURN FOR BOTH THE YEARS BEFORE HIM. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED BEFORE ADIT (INTERNATIONA L TAXATION) THAT HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RISHIKESH APARTMENT COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD., 253 ITR 310 HELD AS UNDER: DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE. FAILURE TO DEDUCT TAX . INTEREST ENTIRE TAX PAYABLE BY PAYEE PAID BY HIM AS ADVANCE TAX AND TAX ON SELF ASSESSMENT INTEREST I NTEREST CANNOT BE LEVIED U/S 201(1A) INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 . THEREFORE, PROCEEDINGS INITIATED U/S 201 AND 201(1A ) WAS REQUESTED TO DROP AFTER THE JUDGMENT CITED ABOVE BY THE ASSESSEE . THE ASSESSEE FILED THE DETAILS OF CONTRACT WITH RECONCILIATION BEFORE THE ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) FOR BOTH THE FINANCIAL YEARS. AFTER CONSI DERING ASSESSEE'S REPLY, ITA NO. 521/JP/2011 ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), JAIPUR .VS NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, CHITTORGARH . 4 HE HELD THAT ITO-TDS HAS ISSUED A CERTIFICATE U/S 1 95/197 ON 12-04-2006 FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2006-07 BY DIRECTING HIM TO DEDU CT TAX @ 1.9%+SURCHARGE@2.5%+EDUCATIONAL CESS @ 2% FOR THE PAYMENT RECEIVED RELATING TO EAST WEST CORRIDOR PROJECT PA CKAGE-R-6, REHABILITATION ON AND UPGRADING OF ROAD SECTIONS ON N-76 AND N 25. THE SECOND ORDER WAS DATED 28-07-2006 WHEREIN ITO TDS WARD- 1, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION HAS DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO DEDUCT TDS @ 1% INSTEAD OF @ 1.9%+SURCHARGE 2 2.5% +EDUCATION CESS @ 2% FOR THE SAME PROJECT. THE ASSESSEES REQUESTED HAS BEEN TUR NED DOWN BY ITO TDS THAT THIS ORDER SHOULD BE MADE EFFECTIVE FOR TH E PERIOD 1-11-2006 TO 31-03-2007. THE ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) HELD THAT ASSESSEE MADE PAYMENT OF RS. 20,91,08,552/- AT LOWER RATE OF TDS THAN THE APPLICABLE RATE OF 41.82% WITHOUT ANY AUTHORIZATION FROM THE I NCOME-TAX DEPTT DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR FINANCIAL YEAR 2006-07. S IMILAR FINDINGS WAS GIVEN FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08 BY ADIT (INTER NATIONAL TAXATION) FOR PAYMENT OF RS. 81,63,07,941/- . THE ADIT (INTER NATIONAL TAXATION) HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS LIABLE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2006-07 FOR NOT WITHHOLDING THE TAX OF RS. 8,32,62,510/- ON PAYMENT OF RS. 20,91,08,552/- AND FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08 FOR N OT WITHHOLDING THE TAX OF RS. 31,88,77,276/ ON PAYMENT OF RS. 81,63,07,941 /-. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF HINDUSTAN COCO COLA BEVERAGE (P) LTD. VS. CIT (207) 293 ITR 226, HE ITA NO. 521/JP/2011 ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), JAIPUR .VS NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, CHITTORGARH . 5 CHARGED THE INTEREST U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT TILL TH E DATE OF PAYMENT OF TAXES BY THE DEDUCTEE. THUS HE CALCULATED THE INTER EST U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT FROM THE DATE OF DEDUCTION OF TAX TILL 31 ST MARCH OF THE RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR. THE INTEREST FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 200 6-07 WAS CALCULATED AT RS. 62,3,895/- AND FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08 AT RS .58,05,368/-. 2.2 BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ADIT (INTERNATI ONAL TAXATION), THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT( A) WHEREIN THE LD. CIT(A) HELD THAT SAID COMPANY M/S. CHINA GEZHOUBA W ATER & POWER (GROUP) CO. LTD. NEW DELHI HAD ESTABLISHED ITS BRAN CH-WISE OFFICES IN INDIA AND FOR EXECUTION OF PROJECTS IN THE YEAR 200 5-06. AS PER BACK TO BACK AGREEMENT ENTERED BETWEEN M/S. CHINA GEZHOUBA WATER & POWER (GROUP) CO. LTD. AND SUB-CONTRACTOR M/S. SOMA, THE FOREIGN COMPANY WAS REQUIRED TO TRANSFER ALL RECEIPTS PERTAINING TO WOR K DONE OR MOBILIZATION ADVANCES TO M/S. SOMA AFTER RETENTION OF 4% AS THE STIPULATED COMMISSION. THE TOTAL AMOUNT RECEIVED BY M/S. CHINA GEZHOUBA WATER & POWER (GROUP) CO. LTD. FROM THE ASSESSEE DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2006-07 WAS RS. 74,71,03,382/- AND AMOUNT PAID TO M /S. SOMA WAS RS. 72,05,65,283/- LEAVING DIFFERENTIAL INCOME OF RS. 2 ,65,38,099/- ONLY CHARGEABLE TO TAX. AFTER DEBITING THE EXPENSES INCU RRED BY M/S. CHINA GEZHOUBA WATER & POWER (GROUP) CO. LTD., THE NET I NCOME WAS DISCLOSED AT RS. 1,11,85,675/- FOR A.Y. 2007-08 AND AFTER GETTING CREDIT FOR TDS, M/S. CHINA GEZHOUBA WATER & POWER (GROUP) CO. LTD. GOT ITA NO. 521/JP/2011 ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), JAIPUR .VS NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, CHITTORGARH . 6 REFUND OF RS. 18.82 LACS. THE CERTIFICATE WAS ISSUE D BY ITO, TDS WARD- 1, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI. FINALLY, THE TDS RATE WAS DECIDED @ 1% FOR PAYMENT OF RS. 20,91,08,552/- MADE EVEN AF TER 31-10-2006 AND REMITTED THE SAME TO THE CENTRAL GOVT. THE LD. CIT( A) CONSIDERED VARIOUS DECISIONS ON THIS ISSUE. IN THE INSTANT CASE M/S. C HINA GEZHOUBA WATER & POWER (GROUP) CO. LTD. HAS RETAINED ONLY 4% OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SU BMITTED THE DETAILS OF TOTAL RECEIPTS, TDS DEDUCTED, 4% OF CONTRACT RECEIP TS AND EXCESS TDS DEDUCTED WHICH HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BY THE LD. CIT(A ) AT PAGE 19 OF HIS ORDER AND HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEDUCED EXCESS TDS FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2006-07. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEE'S ABOV E DETAILS, THE LD. CIT(A) HELD THAT IF IN CASE IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS RELATING TO RECIPIENT, IT IS ULTIMATELY HELD THAT THE SUM RECEI VED BY THE RECIPIENT WAS NOT CHARGEABLE TO TAX, THE EFFECT OF THAT WOULD BE THAT THERE WAS NO OBLIGATION ON THE ASSESSEE TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE ON THE SUM PAID TO THE NON-RESIDENT AND IN THAT EVENTUALITY, THE ASSESSEE WILL NOT BE TREATED ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT AND WOULD BE ABSOLVED OF ANY C ONSEQUENCES FOR NON- DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE. THE LIABILITY OF THE PA YER FOR THE DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE CEASES IF THE PAYER HAS OFFERED THE I NCOME FOR TAXATION IN HIS HANDS AND THE FACTS DO NOT NECESSITATE THE MAKING O F ANY FURTHER PAYMENT OF TAX. HE FOUND THAT IN CASE THE AO HAS PROCEEDED TO CHARGE INTEREST U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT ON THE PAYMENTS MADE TO M/S. CHI NA GEZHOUBA WATER ITA NO. 521/JP/2011 ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), JAIPUR .VS NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, CHITTORGARH . 7 & POWER (GROUP) CO. LTD. AFTER 30-10-2006 SINCE TH E PAYEE HAD OBTAINED CERTIFICATE U/S 197 FROM ITO-TDS , NEW DELHI FOR DE DUCTION AT LOWER RATES. THE ASSESSEE HAD DEDUCTED TDS OF RS. 5,82,27 5/- UPTO 30-10-06 WHICH WAS IN FACT MORE THAN THE TOTAL TAX LIABILITY OF RS. 46,77,848/- DETERMINED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE PAYEE PAS SED ON 30-12-2009. HE FURTHER RELIED ON DECISION OF HON'BLE JURISDICTI ONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RAJASTHAN RAJAYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NI GAM LTD., 287 ITR 354 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT WHEN THE PAYEE HAS PAID MORE TAX THAN THE TAX PAYABLE IT AND REFUND IS DUE TO IT AS A RESULT OF TDS BY THE ASSESSEE, INTEREST U/S 201(1A) CANNOT BE CHARGED. THIS DECISION IS FULLY APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE AS THER E WAS NO LOSS TO THE REVENUE FOR NON-DEDUCTION OF TAX. FINALLY, THE LD. CIT(A) DIRECTED THE AO TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY HIM AND ALLOWED THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL. 2.3 NOW THE REVENUE IS BEFORE US. THE LD. DR SUPPOR TED THE ORDER OF THE AO AND ARGUED THAT AS PER SECTION 201(1A), THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO PAY INTEREST ON NO TDS DEDUCTED OR LESSER TDS DEDU CTED. THE ITO TDS HAD NOT ISSUED THE BLANKET CERTIFICATE U/S 195 OF T HE ACT FOR ALL THE PAYMENTS AND THE PARTY SHOULD NOT PUT ITS FEET IN T HE SHOES TO THE AO TO DECIDE WHETHER THE PAYMENTS TO NON-RESIDENT IS TAXA BLE OR NOT. THEREFORE, THE LD. DR REQUESTED TO CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE AO . 2.4 AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR REITERATED THE ARGUME NTS MADE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND RELIED ON HIS ORDER. THE LD. AR OF T HE ASSESSEE DREW OUR ITA NO. 521/JP/2011 ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), JAIPUR .VS NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, CHITTORGARH . 8 ATTENTION THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS ANALYZED EACH AND EVE RY ASPECT OF SECTION 201 & 201(1A ) ALONGWITH SECTION 195 AFTER CONSIDER ING THE LEGAL PROPOSITION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ON THIS ISSUE AND HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT LIABLE TO PAY INTEREST 201(1A) OF THE ACT. HE FURTHER RELIED ON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN TH E CASE OF CIT VS. RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM , 287 ITR 35 4 AND THE LD. AR REQUESTED TO CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 2.5 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND FROM THE RECORDS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAD EXAMINED ISSUE IN DETAIL BY CONSIDERING THE AGREEME NT BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND THE CASE LAWS CITED (SUPRA). HE HAS ALSO VERIFI ED THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS THAT THE ASSESSEE FINALLY GOT REFUND ON 4% CONTRACTED RECEIPT MADE BY M/S. CHINA GEZHOUBA WATER & POWER (GROUP) CO. L TD.. THE DECISION OF HON'BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF HINDUSTAN COCO COLA BEVERAGE (P) LTD. VS. CIT (SUPRA) IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE ON THIS ISSUE. THE DECISION OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CI T VS. RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD. ALSO SUPPORT THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD AS UNDER:- ITA NO. 521/JP/2011 ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), JAIPUR .VS NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, CHITTORGARH . 9 WHERE THE TRIBUNAL HAD FOUND THAT IN ALL THE CASE S, THE RECIPIENT OF THE INCOME HAD CLAIMED REFUND, WHICH H AD ARISEN DUE TO TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE. HELD, THAT INTEREST CO ULD NOT BE CHARGED U/S 201(1A) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. THE LD. DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). THUS RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF HON'BLE APEX C OURT IN THE CASE OF HINDUSTAN COCO COLA BEVERAGE (P) LTD. VS. CIT AND T HE ORDER OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RA JASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD. (SUPRA), WE FIND NO REASON TO I NTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS SUSTAINED. THUS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 IS DISMISSED. WE HAVE ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 09 ARE SIMILAR. THUS IN VIEW OF THE SIMILAR FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, WE FIND NO RE ASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS SUSTAINED. THUS THE AP PEAL OF THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 IS ALSO DISMISSED. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE D ISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 /0 7/2015. SD/- SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH VH-VKJ-EHUK (R.P.TOLANI) (T.R. MEENA) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 17/07/2015 *MISHRA ITA NO. 521/JP/2011 ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), JAIPUR .VS NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, CHITTORGARH . 10 VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), J AIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- M/S. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, CHITTORGARH. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.521/JP/2011) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR