2013 (1) TMI 478 - HC - Income Tax

TDS Credit - Conversion of Partnership firm into Company - assessee along with three others entered into a joint venture agreement - credit of TDS claimed on contract work receipts - refused to give credit on the ground that some of the TDS certificates belong to the joint venture and some other TDS certificates are in the name of Directors and do not relate to the assessee firm/company - not eligible for TDS credit as same is not in accordance with Rule 37-B A - Held that - CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal have rightly held that the assessee is entitled to the credit of the TDS mentioned in the TDS certificates issued by the contractor, whether the said certificate is issued in the name of the Joint Venture or in the name of a Director of the assessee company considering the terms of the agreement dated 12-03-2003 among the parties to the joint venture and held that credit for TDS certificates cannot be denied to the assessee while assessing the contract receipts mentioned in the said certificates as income of the assessee. The income shown in the TDS certificates has either to be taxed in the hands of the joint venture or in the hands of the individual co-joint venturer. As the joint venture has not filed return of income and claimed credit for TDS certificates and the TDS certificates have not been doubted, credit has to be granted to the TDS mentioned therein for the assessee. Rule 37BA is a procedural provision dealing with the manner of giving credit for tax deducted at source for the purposes of section 199. It therefore applies to pending proceedings. As observed in State of Madras v. Lateef Hamid & Co. AIR 1971 (9) TMI 155 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA , where a new procedure is prescribed by law, it governs all pending cases. Alterations in the form of procedure are always retrospective, unless there is some good reason or other why they should not be. The amendment to Rule 37 BA mentioned above which has been introduced by the Income Tax (8th amendment) Rules, 2011 notified vide Notification No. 57/2011 dated 24-10-2011, being procedural in nature, would have retrospective effect and has to be given effect to as decided in Tikaram & Sons v. Commissioner of Sales Tax AIR 1968 (3) TMI 92 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA The Revenue cannot be allowed to retain tax deducted at source without credit being available to anybody. If credit of tax is not allowed to the assessee, and the joint venture has not filed a return of income, then credit of the TDS cannot be taken by anybody. This is not the spirit and intention of law. Therefore AO erred in denying the benefit of the TDS on the ground that the TDS certificate is issued in the name of the joint venture or a Director and not the assessee - in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Assessment of tax deductions in joint venture agreements.
2. Credit for tax deducted at source (TDS) certificates.
3. Interpretation of Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules.
4. Retroactive application of procedural amendments.

Analysis:
1. The case involved the assessment of tax deductions in a joint venture agreement where each party was responsible for its own profit or loss. The firm and the company, as co-venturers, had separate responsibilities for executing work and receiving contract receipts, leading to a dispute over the credit for TDS certificates.

2. The assessing officer initially refused to give credit for TDS certificates, arguing that some were in the name of the joint venture and others in the name of directors, not directly related to the assessee. However, the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal allowed the appeals, emphasizing that the TDS certificates should be considered for the income of the joint venture or individual co-venturers, and credit should be granted accordingly.

3. Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules was crucial in determining the entitlement to credit for TDS certificates. The rule specified the conditions under which credit for tax deducted at source should be given, including situations where income is assessable in the hands of a person other than the deductee. The Tribunal relied on this rule to support the assessee's claim for TDS credit.

4. The retrospective application of procedural amendments was also discussed, highlighting that changes in procedural rules are usually applied retrospectively unless there are compelling reasons not to do so. The amendment to Rule 37BA, introduced in 2011, was considered procedural and was deemed to have a retrospective effect, impacting the assessment of TDS credit in the case.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeals, stating that the assessing officer erred in denying the benefit of TDS mentioned in the certificates. The court upheld the decisions of the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal, emphasizing the entitlement of the assessee to TDS credit based on the joint venture agreement and Rule 37BA. The judgment underscored the importance of correctly applying tax deduction provisions in joint ventures and procedural rules for TDS credit.