9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 442X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no reason to reject the grounds. In any event, the Tribunal ought to have rendered a finding on the grounds raised by the assessee with regard to the applicability of Section 194C on the IUC paid to the other telecom operators. Had the Tribunal considered and rendered a finding that it was not convinced with the submissions made, then, it would have been well justified to proceed to consider the alternate submissions. We find from the impugned order that the Tribunal has not rendered any finding with regard to the contentions advanced by the assessee relating to the applicability of Section 194C. Tribunal remanded the matter to the AO. The Tribunal set aside the orders of the Lower Authorities in their entirety. Thus, if the remand is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... han, SSC assisted by Mr.S.Rajesh JUDGMENT T .S.SIVAGNANAM, J. This appeal, filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act), is directed against the order dated 07.2.2019 in ITA.No.339/Chny/2018 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'A' Bench for the assessment year 2007-08. The Tribunal, by the impugned order, set aside the order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 05.4.2007 and the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Chennai-34 [for short, the CIT(A)] dated 21.11.2017 and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer. 2. The assessee has filed this appeal by raising the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eepika Murali and Mr.Karthik Sundaram, learned counsel on record for the appellant and Mr.Karthik Ranganathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Mr.S.Rajesh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent. With consent, the main appeal itself is taken up for final disposal. 4. It is submitted by Mr.Tarun Gulati, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that the Tribunal, though, in paragraph 3 of the impugned order, noted the submission of the assessee that they assailed application of Section 194C of the Act on interconnection usage charges (IUC) paid to other telecom operators, in the operative portion of the order, the Tribunal did not discuss the said issue nor rendered any finding. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he attention of this Court to the written submissions filed by the assessee before the Tribunal on 03.12.2018 wherein all the points were canvassed and more particularly with regard to application of Section 194C of the Act. 6. It is further submitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee that even on merits, the issue is covered in favour of the assessee in the light of the decision of the Kolkatta Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vodafone East Ltd. Vs. Additional CIT [reported in (2015) 61 Taxmann. Com 263]. It is also submitted that this decision was noted by the Tribunal when it heard the stay petition and passed orders on 16.3.2018 granting stay of 50% of the demand on the ground tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered view, if a litigant raises a legal issue before a court or a tribunal as a principal ground of challenge and without prejudice and not in derogation with the said plea, the litigant is also entitled to raise alternate submissions. So far as the taxation matters are concerned, the grounds raised by the assessee can, at times, be contradictory and there is no reason to reject the grounds. In any event, the Tribunal ought to have rendered a finding on the grounds raised by the assessee with regard to the applicability of Section 194C of the Act on the IUC paid to the other telecom operators. Had the Tribunal considered and rendered a finding that it was not convinced with the submissions made, then, it would have been wel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
