ACIT, Jaipur V. RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD, Jaipur

ITA 585/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5004 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 01-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Section: 201(1); 6

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 HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH YFYR DQEKJ] U;KF;D LN L; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 585/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), JAIPUR. CUKE VS. M/S RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD, AVAS BHAWAN, JYOTI NAGAR, JANPATH, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@VSU L A-@ PAN/TAN NO.: JPRR 02689 B VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA (ADDL.CIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C. PARWAL (CA) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 07/10/2016 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[ K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24/10/2016 VKNS'K @ ORDER PER: LALIET KUMAR, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18/03/2016 PASSED BY THE LD CIT(A)-III, JAIPUR FOR T HE A.Y. 2014-15. THE SOLE EFFECTIVE GROUND OF APPEAL IS AS UNDER:- I) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE DEMAND OF RS. 57,54,082/- RAISED VIDE ORDER U/S 201(1)/201(1A) OF THE IT ACT FOR NON DEDUCTION OF TDS U/S 194LA R.W.S. 201(1 ) ITA 585/JP/2016_ ACIT VS M/S RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD 2 & 201(1A) OF IT ACT ON COMPENSATION PAID ON ACQUISITION OF LAND NOT USED FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPO SES. 2. THE LEARNED D.R. HAS VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORD ER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUB MITTED THAT THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF T HE HONBLE ITAT, JAIPUR BENCHES IN THE CASE OF JDA VS ACIT (TDS) PASSED IN I TA NO. 134 TO 136/JP/2015 ORDER DATED 29/05/2015, IN FAVOUR OF TH E ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, HE PRAYED TO ALLOW THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AND DISMISS ED THE REVENUES APPEAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD AS WELL THE ORDER P ASSED BY THE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF JDA. WE FIND MERIT IN THE CONT ENTION OF THE LD. AR THAT THE SIMILAR ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE COORDINAT E BENCH IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF JDA VS. ACIT IN ITA NO. 134 TO 136/JP/2015. THE FINDING OF THE COORDINATE BENCH IS REPRODUCED HE REUNDER:- 2.9 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUS ED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM THE RECORD, IT EMERGES TH AT THE ASSESSEE DEMONSTRATED ITS CASE FOR NO LIABILITY OF TDS BEFORE THE ACIT TDS THAT NOT ONLY IN TERMS OF PLAIN READIN G OF ITA 585/JP/2016_ ACIT VS M/S RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD 3 SECTION 194LA BUT ALSO FURNISHED THE DESIRED INFORM ATION IN THE PROFORMA AND ENCLOSURES AS ADVISED BY THE AO TO BE FURNISHED IN THE ORDER TO HOLD JDA AS NOT LIABLE UN DER EXPLANATION (I) ABOVE. HAVING COMPLIED WITH THE REQU IREMENT, ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED ITS ONUS. BESIDES IN VIEW OF THE AHEMDABAD AND BOMBAY ITAT JUDGMENTS, THE LIABILITY O F ASSESSEE U/S 194LA CANNOT BE EXTENDED TO GO BEYOND THE PLAIN MEANING OF THE LETTERS OF SECTION AND INFUSE SUCH CONDITIONS WHICH ARE NOT MENTIONED IN THE PROVISIONS . IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ENTIRETY OF THE FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT:- (I) THE ASSESSEE COMPLIED WITH REQUIREMENTS ASKED FO R BY THE AO. THERE IS NO ADVERSE COMMENT ON THIS ISSUE. (II) SECTION 194A DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY PHYSICAL VE RIFICATION OF THE ASSESSEE TO INSPECT THE FIELDS AND FIND OUT WHETHER THE LANDS ARE ACTUALLY CULTIVATED OR NOT. WH AT SECTION IMPOSES IS DETERMINATION OF THE RECORD WHICH HAS BEEN DONE BY THE ASSESSEE. (III) BARANI LAND IS A TYPE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND WH ICH IS CLEARLY EVIDENT FROM REVENUE REGULATIONS AND RECORD PLACED ON THE PAPER BOOK. THE OBJECTION RAISED BY THE AO AND L D. CIT(A) ABOUT GIRDAWARI IS IRRELEVANT AND NO- CONSEQUENTIAL. (IV) TEHSILDAR APPOINTED BY JDA CANNOT BE DENIED T O BE A REVENUE OFFICER INASMUCH AS HE WORKS AS A REVENUE OFFICER IN TERMS OF JDA ACT. (V) THE LANGUAGE OF SECTION 194LA BEING PLAIN AND SIMPLE IT PROVIDES NO PHYSICAL VERIFICATION OF LAND BY LAO AB OUT ITA 585/JP/2016_ ACIT VS M/S RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD 4 CARRYING ON OF AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS. IN THE FRAM EWORK OF SEC. 194LA, THERE IS NO NEED OF APPLYING RULES O F INTERPRETATION AND IMPOSING FURTHER CONDITION TO GO BEYOND THE SCOPE OF OBLIGATION AS PRESCRIBED UNDER THE ACT. IN VIEW THEREOF, WE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE FROM THE RECORD THAT IMPUGNED AGRICULTU RAL LAND ACQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AGRICULTURAL LAND ON P ER RECORDS AND IN TERMS OF SECTION 194LA, EXPLANATION (I). THER E IS NO OBLIGATION TO DEDUCT ANY TDS THEREON. THUS THERE IS NO QUESTION OF RAISING DEMAND AGAINST THE ASSESSEE U/S 201(1) AND 201(1A) OF THE ACT AND HOLD THE ASSESSEE TO BE IN DEFAULT. CONSEQUENTLY, THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AR E REVERSED AND THE DEMANDS RAISED IN QUESTION BY THE DEPARTMEN T ARE QUASHED. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE LAND ACQUIRED BY THE JAIPU R DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AFTER FOLLOWING TH E PROCEDURE AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 ( IN SHORT THE LA ACT). THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR HAD ISSUED NOTIFICATI ON U/S 6 OF THE LA ACT AND THEREAFTER THE COMPENSATION WAS ALSO GRANTED TO THE LAND OWNERS. IN ALL THE THREE PROCEEDINGS, THE NATURE OF THE LAND H AS BEEN MENTIONED AS AGRICULTURE. IN OUR VIEW, THE INSISTENCE OF THE A.O. TO PRODUCE THE GIRDAWARI REPORT, WAS NOT REQUIRED AS PER INCOME TAX A CT, ONCE THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, GRANTED THE COMPENSATION AFT ER TREATING THE LAND AS ITA 585/JP/2016_ ACIT VS M/S RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD 5 AGRICULTURE. BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE COORDINATE BENCH ON THE SIMILAR ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION IN THE CASE O F JDA, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24/10/2016. SD/- SD/- HKKXPAN YFYR DQEKJ (BHAGCHAND) (LALIET KUMAR) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ @ JAIPUR FNUKAD @ DATED:- 24 TH OCTOBER, 2016 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- THE ACIT, (TDS), JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- M/S RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD, JAIPUR . 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 585/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR