9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 727X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icatory in nature is applicable with retrospective effect, thereby covering the year under consideration, as rightly held by the learned CIT(A), and the Learned Departmental Representative has not raised any contention to dispute or controvert the position. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the impugned order of the learned CIT(A), giving limited relief to the assessee by relying on the first proviso to S.201(1), which is applicable to the year under consideration, and upholding the same, we dismiss the appeal preferred by the Revenue. - Decided against revenue. - ITA No.1668/Hyd/2014,ITA No.1669/Hyd/2014 - - - Dated:- 15-7-2015 - Shri P.M.Jagtap and Shri Saktijit Dey, JJ. For the Petitionet : Shri J.Siri Kumar DR For the Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Officer on 31.12.2009 treating the assessee as in default for its failure to deduct tax at source as required under the provisions of S.194H, as well as for interest due under S.201(1A) of the Act. Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under S.201(1) and S.201(1A), the assessee went in appeal before the learned CIT(A), who vide his order date 8.4.2011 directed the Assessing Officer to examine whether the taxes were already paid by the deductees i.e. distributors and give credit for the same. The Assessing Officer was also directed by the learned CIT(A) to charge interest under S.201(1A) from the date on which the tax was payable to the date on which the tax was actually paid by the deductees. This relief was allowed by the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e company for assessment year 2009-10 at ₹ 12,68,00,387 as was originally determined vide order dated 31.12.2009. 4. Against the consequential order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 31.12.2013, the assessee again preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A), and during the course of appellate proceedings, various submissions were made by the assessee, which, as summarized by the learned CIT(A) in his impugned order, were as under- a) That the relationship between the appellant and the distributors is on principal to principal basis. b) The pre-paid SIM Cards are sold at a particular price to the distributors (Distributor Price). The distributor retains his margin and sells it to the retailer at Retailer Price. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, relief to that extent has to be given. 6. After considering the above submissions made by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) found that the issue as to whether the difference between the Maximum Selling Charge and the Distributor s Rate was in the nature of commission liable for deduction of tax at source under S.194H or not was pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in assessee s own case. He observed that the limited issue involved in the appeal of the assessee therefore, was whether relief could be given in cases where the assessee had submitted certificate from Chartered Accountant confirming that the deductees have declared income and paid the tax. In this regard, she relied on the first proviso to S.201(1) inserted in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perused the relevant material on record. It is observed that the learned CIT(A) by her impugned order has given a limited relief to the assessee relying on the first proviso to S.201(1). The said proviso inserted in the statute book with effect from 1.7.2012 reads as under S.201(1)..... Provided that any person, including the principal officer a company, who fails to deduct the whole or any part the tax in accordance with the provisions this Chapter on the sum paid to a resident or on the sum credited to the account a resident shall not be deemed to be an assessee in default in respect such tax if such resident- (i) has furnished his return income under section 139; (ii) has taken into account such sum for computing income in s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
