9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment involves issues related to the competence of the Assessing Officer to pass an order u/s 201(1A) after a previous order was cancelled, liability to deduct tax u/s 195 for a non-resident seller, and the correctness of charging interest u/s 201(1A) beyond the date of tax payment. Competence of Assessing Officer to pass order u/s 201(1A): The appellant contended that the Assessing Officer lacked legal authority to issue a fresh notice under section 201(1A) after a previous order was cancelled by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The appellant argued that once an order is cancelled without a direction to redo the same, the Assessing Officer cannot pass a new order for the same default. However, the Tribunal referred to a High Court decision which stated that in certain cases, a fresh order can be made by the competent authority even without a specific order of remand. The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer was competent to pass a fresh order in this case. Liability to deduct tax u/s 195 for non-resident seller: The appellant claimed that she was not liable to deduct tax u/s 195 as the seller was a non-resident Hindu Undivided Family (HUF). However, the Tribunal noted that the seller had filed returns as a non-resident and the agreement of sale indicated that the sellers were non-residents. As there was no evidence to suggest that the appellant believed the sellers were residents, the Tribunal upheld that the appellant was liable to deduct tax u/s 195. Charging of interest u/s 201(1A) beyond tax payment date: The appellant argued that interest under section 201(1A) was wrongly charged beyond the date of tax payment by the seller. The Tribunal referenced a High Court judgment stating that interest cannot be levied after the tax is paid. As the tax along with interest was paid by the seller on a revised return date, the Tribunal held that there was no liability of interest under section 201(1A) beyond the tax payment date. In conclusion, the Tribunal partially allowed the appeal based on the above considerations.
|
