9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (2) TMI 1221 - AT - Income TaxTDS u/s 194I and 194A - non deduction of TDS payment to New Okhla Industrial Development Authority ( NOIDA ) on account of lease rent and on account of interest on lease rent - HELD THAT - We observe that the same issue came up for consideration before the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in own case for AY 2011-12 to 2014-15 which followed the decision of Rajesh Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd. 2017 (2) TMI 1109 - DELHI HIGH COURT of which decision, in turn, has been affirmed by Supreme Court in New Okhla Industrial Development Authority . 2018 (8) TMI 1374 - SUPREME COURT as directed that where result of the amounts have been paid by the petitioners, towards TDS as o coercive process used by the Revenue, the GNOIDA shall make appropri orders to credit/reimburse such payments. It is clarified that GNOIDA shall ensure that reimbursement is made to compensate the petitioners' excess payments; the income tax authorities shall not pursue any coercive methods for recovery of the amounts, or penalty, once the basic liability (with interest, to be paid by GNOIDA) is satisfied. The impugned orders are quashed; the Revenue shall make consequential orders, to give effect to this judgment, after duly hearing the petitioners and those likely to be affected, within 12 weeks from today. Respectfully following the decision of Tribunal (supra), we set aside the matter and restore it to the file of the Ld. AO to follow the directions of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the decision (supra) and decide it afresh in the light thereof.
Issues Involved:
The appeal challenges the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding the Assessment Year 2015-16, focusing on the alleged lack of opportunity for hearing, TDS assessment order, and judicial discipline. Issue 1 - Lack of Opportunity for Hearing: The appellant contends that the order of the CIT (A) was passed without granting an opportunity for hearing, violating the Faceless Appeal Scheme and principles of natural justice. This ground was raised due to the perceived injustice in the order. Issue 2 - TDS Assessment Order: The CIT (A) confirmed the TDS assessment order, which included an addition of Rs. 14,92,098 for failure to deduct tax at source under sections 194I and 194A on payments made to New Okhla Industrial Development Authority. The appellant argued against this decision, citing similar matters remanded back by the ITAT for preceding assessment years. Issue 3 - Judicial Discipline: The CIT (A) was criticized for confirming the TDS assessment order without considering the previous remanded matters, leading to an assertion that the order passed was against judicial discipline. Summary of Judgment: During the Assessment Year 2015-16, the appellant made payments to New Okhla Industrial Development Authority for lease rent and interest on lease rent. The Assessing Officer found that TDS under sections 194I and 194A was not deducted, resulting in a demand of Rs. 14,92,098. Despite the appellant's unsuccessful appeal, the Tribunal considered the issue of whether the lease rental payments were subject to TDS. The AR argued that this issue was previously addressed by a Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the appellant's favor for earlier assessment years. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision involving Rajesh Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd., where the High Court directed that lease rent payments were subject to TDS. Following this precedent, the Tribunal set aside the matter and instructed the Assessing Officer to adhere to the High Court's directions. This decision was in line with the Supreme Court's affirmation of the High Court's ruling. Consequently, the appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was restored for fresh consideration by the Assessing Officer based on the High Court's directives.
|
