9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver, not content by this tax withholding. Their view is that the assessee ought to have treated these payments as rental payments and, accordingly, deducted the tax at source @ 10% under section 194 I. However, the payment of lounge facilities cannot, by any stretch of logic, be characterized as payment under any lease, sub-lease, tenancy or any other agreement or arrangement for the use of (either separately or together) any,-(a) land; or (b) building (including factory building); or (c) land appurtenant to a building (including factory building); or (d) machinery; or (e) plant; or (f) equipment; or (g) furniture; or (h)fittings as is the condition precedent for invoking section 194 I. The payments in question have been rightly treated a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y on this basis, was to be computed @ 10% under section 194 I of the Act. Reliance was placed on a judgment of Hon ble Delhi High Court, in the case of CIT Vs Japan Airlines Limited [(2010) 325 ITR 298 (Del)]. Accordingly, a tax withholding demand @8% for short deduction of tax at source was raised, and interest was also levied on the delay in realization of this short deduction of tax at source. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). In an elaborate and erudite order, learned CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer and declined to interfere in the matter. The assessee is aggrieved and is in further appeal before us. 3. We have heard the learned Departmental Representative, though none ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (including factory building); or (d) machinery; or (e) plant; or (f) equipment; or (g) furniture; or (h)fittings as is the condition precedent for invoking section 194 I. The payments in question have been rightly treated as payments for services rendered under a contract, which are covered under section 194C, and, accordingly, we see no infirmity in the deduction of tax at source @ 2% from the payments in question. 5. As regards the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Japan Airlines (supra), relied upon by the Assessing Officer, we find that the said decision is overruled by Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Japan Airlines Ltd vs CIT [(2015) 377 ITR 372 (SC)]. Learned CIT(A), however, does not give up. He finds certa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s if some one is allowed to have the last word, and that last word, once spoken, is loyally accepted. . . . The better wisdom of the Court below must yield to the higher wisdom of the Court above. That is the strength of the hierarchical judicial system. 6. We wish and hope that the learned CIT(Appeals) takes note of these observations of the Apex Court and permits his better wisdom to yield to the higher wisdom of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, which is the highest appellate authority under the Income-tax Act. His pedantic approach is also not an approach that is conducive to the ease of doing business, on which the Government is placing so much of emphasis. In any event, tax deduction at source is only a vicarious liability, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
