Ecologic Building System Private Limited, Delhi V. ACIT, Circle-8(1), Delhi

ITA 800/DEL/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 116076 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 29-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 22-03-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 154; 40(a)(ia)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Ms. Astha Chandra, Judicial Member ITA No. 800/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Ecologic Building System Pvt. Ltd., DLF-1650/51, Chhatarpur, Gadaipur Road, Mehrauli, New Delhi-110030 Vs ACIT, Circle-8(1), New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AACCE1444P Assessee by : Sh. Pranshu Goel, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 30.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 29.09.2023 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 14.02.2023. 2. Following grounds have been raised by the assessee in this appeal: “1. That the order as passed by the Ld. CIT (Appeals) is bad in law and contrary to the fact of the case. 2. That no Show Cause Notice was given by the Ld CIT(A) before rejecting the appeal although keeping in view the principle of natural justice he had all powers. Infact while uploading the Grounds of Appeal it is observed that page no 2 of the form 35 was uploaded of the another assesse inspite of the fact that as per copy of preview version of form 35 it was showing the correct form of appeal. Even otherwise keeping in view the principle of natural justice the CIT(A) must give an opportunity to rectify this unintended and inadvertent error. ITA No. 800/Del/2023 Ecologic Building System Pvt. Ltd. 2 3. That the Ld CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case by rejecting the appeal of the appellant as per para 4 of the CIT(A) order dt. 14-02-2023 on the ground that none of the parameter mentioned in the ground of appeals bears any resemblance to case under reference. 4. That the Ld CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the facts that the submission as made before CIT(A) are on the basis of actual disallowance of interest made in the assessment order and not on the ground as mentioned in para 4 of CIT(A) order. 5. That the disallowance has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT (A) without verifying and appreciating the facts placed before the Appellate Authority. 6. That even on merits of the case the addition of Rs 34,29,874/-as made by the Ld. ACIT and confirmed by the CIT(A) is not tenable in law because of the following reasons:- a. That the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on the facts of the case by confirming the addition of Rs. 34.29.874/- being 30% on interest paid to SIDBI at Rs 1,14,32,913/- for non-deduction of TDS u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. b. That the Ld CIT(A) has erred in law by not deleting the addition of Rs. 34,29,874/-on account of non-deduction of TDS on interest payment to SIDBI without appreciating the facts that the provision of section 194A(3)(iii)(b) of the IT Act, 1961 are not applicable with regard to interest payment to SIDBI which is a financial corporation established by Act of the Parliament. c. That Below the authorities rejected the submissions/ evidences filed during the course of assessment proceedings and rectification proceeding on arbitrary grounds and passed the order u/s 154 of Income Tax Act, 1961. d. That the order passed is non-speaking order and submission as made have been rejected without giving any reason ITA No. 800/Del/2023 Ecologic Building System Pvt. Ltd. 3 3. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 4. The rectification order u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been passed by the Assessing Officer on 14.05.2019. We find that the AO has disallowed the amount of interest paid to SIDBI on the grounds that no tax on such interest payment has been deducted. We find that the interest payment made to SIDBI do not attract TDS as per the provisions of Section 194A(3)(iiib) and hence, the action of the AO taken u/s 154 disallowing the interest u/s 40(a)(ia) cannot be sustained. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 29/09/2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Astha Chandra) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 29/09/2023 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR