9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 497X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n, consolidated order. 2. The only issue arising in the present set of cases is the applicability or otherwise in law of section 194-I of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' hereinafter) to the sums paid by the assessee to Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority ('MMRDA' hereinafter) under a lease agreement. The Revenue claims it to be in the nature of lease rental and at best advance rent, covered u/s.194-I, which provision in fact does not draw any distinction between payments on revenue or capital account. As such, the same is exigible to deduction of tax at source there-under, which has not been deducted. The assessee, on the other hand, claims it to be in the nature of lease premium, i.e., toward acquiring lease-hold rights ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... support of its case. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, would rely on the orders by the assessing authority. 4. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. Plot of land bearing No. G-56, Bandra Kurla Complex, was allotted to the assessee by MMRDA on payment of an initial lease premium of Rs.121 crores for the construction of a hotel with car parking facility vide lease deed dated 04.05.2001. Subsequently, based on a circular in force on 27.08.2007, the assessee was charged 'Balcony Enclosure Fee' at Rs.206.60 lacs, which stands paid during the current year, non-deduction of tax at source on which is the subject matter of dispute for A.Y. 2009-10. The same, even as opined by the ld. CIT(A), is cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rent and, further, as also not covered by any other tax deduction provision, being only by way of modification in the terms of the original deed, so that it could be said to be in the nature of a charge or fee paid under the lease agreement for extension of time. The ld. DR could not, on this view being expressed by us, controvert it in any manner. We, accordingly, have no hesitation in holding the same to be not in the nature of rent and, therefore, not exigible to deduction of tax at source u/s.194I. We decide accordingly. 5. The assessee's COs raise grounds supporting the decision per the impugned orders. The same would in view of our foregoing decision become infructuous, and are accordingly dismissed, albeit for statistical purposes. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
