2018 (2) TMI 93 - AT - Income Tax

Violation of provisions of section 206C - assessee did not collect any tax u/s. 206C(1) of the Act on sale of Timber obtained by any other mode other than under a forest lease - Held that - The issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the coordinate bench decision in assessee s own case 2016 (5) TMI 640 - ITAT KOLKATA we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and are of the view that the sawn timber does not fall under the ambit of tax collection at source within the meaning of section 206C of the Act - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues:
Violation of provisions of section 206C of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The appeals were filed by the assessee against the orders of Ld. CIT(A)-24, Kolkata for AYs 2010-11 to 2012-13. The main issue was whether the assessee violated section 206C of the Act. The AO observed that the assessee, engaged in timber trading, did not collect tax under section 206C(1) on the sale of timber obtained by modes other than under a forest lease. The assessee argued that tax was not collectible on "sawn timber" as it was different from timber as per section 206C. The AO treated the assessee as an assessee in default. The CIT(A) upheld this decision, stating that "sawn timber" was not different from "timber." The assessee appealed, citing a previous bench decision in their favor.

During the hearing, the assessee's counsel referenced a previous bench decision that favored the assessee's position. The tribunal examined the issue and noted that the term "timber" and "sawn timber" were not defined in the Act. The tribunal found merit in the argument that sawn timber was different from timber, citing a tender document that distinguished between the two. It was established that sawn timber was a new commodity made from timber, and the process of converting timber into sawn timber was not done by the assessee. The tribunal also referred to judicial precedents to support the distinction between timber and sawn timber.

Based on the previous bench decision and the lack of new evidence or legal changes presented by the revenue, the tribunal concluded that the sale of sawn timber did not fall under the tax collection provisions of section 206C of the Act. Consequently, the tribunal allowed all the appeals of the assessee, setting aside the CIT(A)'s order.

In conclusion, the tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that "sawn timber" was distinct from "timber" under section 206C of the Act, thereby allowing all the appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the CIT(A).