9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (3) TMI 442X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... These appeals by the assessee are filed against the consolidated order of learned CIT(A), Rohtak dated 17th October, 2011 for the AY 2003-04 to 2008-09. 2. Since common issue is involved in all these appeals, the same are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. The grounds taken by the assessee in all these appeals are identical. We reproduce the grounds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es (CBDT) regarding deduction of TDS u/s 194H from STD/PCO franchises of the BSNL, which are binding on the income tax authorities. 4. The CIT(A) has erred in law in disregarding the binding judicial precedent delivered by Hon ble Jurisdictional ITAT Delhi, B Bench, Delhi in the case of ITO(TDS) Gurgaon Vs. BSNL, GMTD Gurgaon, vide ITA No.3996/D/2004. 5. The CIT(A) has erred in law a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssion paid by BSNL and MTNL to their STD-PCO franchisees may not be enforced by the field formations and only where they have already deducted TDS on commission paid to PCO owners, directed to deposit the same in the government account. 5. The learned DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of authorities below. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant for the A.Y. 2008-09. The issue is whether similar exemption is applicable for the assessment year prior to the assessment year 2008-09. This issue was adjudicated in favour of the assessee by co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee s own case in ITA No.71 to 77/PN/2009. It has taken support from the order of the Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Accounts Officer, BSNL (ITA No.3996/Del/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
