NATIONAL HEALTH EDUCATION SOCIETY, V. ITO (TDS) 2(4),

MA 74/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3493 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 16-03-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MOHAMMED RIZWAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S C TIWARI
• Section: 10

Judgement Text

, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI - F ,BENCH . , , BEFORE S/SH. D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDEN T & RAJENDRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M A NO S . 74 TO 77 /MUM/2015 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 4935 TO 4937 /MUM/201 3 , AND ITA NO.5058/M/2013 / ASSESSMENT YEAR - 20 0 6 - 07 TO 2008 - 09 M/S. NATION AL HEALTH AND EDUCATION SOCIETY (P.D. HINDUJA HOS PITAL & MEDICAL RESEARCH CENTRE) VEER SAVARKAR MARG, MAHIM MUMBAI - 400 0 16 . PAN:AA D TN 0093 Q VS INCOME TAX OFFICER - (TDS) - 2(4) MUMBAI. ( / APPLICANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.C. TIWARI / REVENUE BY :SHRI MOHAMMED RIZWAN / DATE OF HEARING : 14 - 08 - 2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14 - 08 - 2015 , 1961 254 ( 1 ) ORDER U/S.254(1)OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT,1961(ACT) PER RAJENDRA, AM - VIDE ITS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS, DATED 09 .03.2015 , THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT THERE WERE MISTAKES APPARENT FROM THE RECORD IN THE ORDE R DATED 6.2.2015 AND 10.2.2015, THAT THE SAME WERE TO BE RECTIFIED AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 254 OF THE ACT. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT THE ISSUE OF DEDUCTION OF TAX U/S. 194J VIS - - VIS SECTION 192 WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE TRIBUNAL, WHI LE DECIDING THE APPEAL FOR THE A SSESSMENT Y EAR S(AY.S.)2009 - 10, 2010 - 11 AND 2011 - 12 , THAT WHILE DECIDING THE APPEALS FOR THE ABOVE MENTIONED YEARS THE TRIBUNAL HAD MENTIONED THAT THE FOLLOWING ORDERS FOR THE SUBSEQUENT AY.S.(2009 - 10TO 2011 - 12) MATTER WA S BEING RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ( A O), THAT IN THE AY . S . 2009 - 10 TO 2011 - 12 THE MATTER WAS NOT REMITTED BACK TO THE AO. 2. DURING T HE COURSE OF HEAR ING BEFORE US, THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE REITERATED THE FACTS MENTIONED IN THE APPLICATIONS . DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE(DR)LEFT THE MATTER TO THE DISCRETION OF THE BENCH. 3. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR THE ABOVE MENTIONED AY.S. WE FIND THAT WHILE DECIDING THE LEAD APPEAL, FOR T HE AY.2009 - 10, THE ISSUE OF DEDUCTION OF TAX (GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1) WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND SOME OF THE ISSUES WERE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO,THAT WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL F OR THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS (AY.2006 - 07T O 08 - 09) IT WAS MENTIONED BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE ISSUE OF TDS WAS BEING RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO . S.AS THE MISTAKE S ARE APPARENT FROM RECORD, THEREFORE , WE ALLOW THE MISCELLANEOUS APPL ICATION FILED BY THE ASSES SEE.WE DECIDE GROUNDS PERTAINING TO DEDUCTION OF TAX IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE.IN OTHER WORDS,WE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RIGHTLY DEDUCTED TAX AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 192 OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF HBCS AND THAT IT HAD NOT TO DEDUCT TAX U/S.194J OF THE ACT. MA - 74,75,76 & 77 / M/ 15 NHES ( 06 - 07 TO 0 8 - 09 ) 2 AS A RESULT,MA.S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ABOVE MENTIONED THREE AY.S. STAND ALLOWED. . . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH AUGUST, 2015. 14 TH , 2015 , SD/ - SD/ - ( . , / D.MANMOHAN ) ( / RAJENDRA) / VICE PRESIDENT / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / MUMBAI, /DATE: 14.08. 2015 . . . JV. SR.PS. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT / 2. RESPONDENT / 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / 5. DR F BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / , , . . . 6. GUARD FILE/ //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , / ITAT, MUMBAI.