FLORENTINE ESTATES OF INDIA LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE , WARD 74(2), DELHI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Avdhesh Kumar Mishra
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2016-17, arises against the CIT(A)-29, New Delhi’s in case No. CIT(A),
Delhi-29/11053/2015-16 dated 09.12.2024, in proceedings u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
Suffice to say, the assessee’s sole substantive grievance raised in the instant appeal challenges both the learned lower authorities respective findings holding it as the assessee in default for not having deducted TDS on payment of external development charges payments made to M/s Haryana Urban Florentine Estates of India Ltd. 2 Development Authority (“HUDA”) which stand treated as contractual payment u/s 194C of the Act.
We notice in this precise factual backdrop that hon’ble juri ictional high court recent decision in Puri Constructions (P) Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (2024) 159 taxmann.com 441 (Del.) has already settled the above sole issue against the assessee and in the department’s favour that such “EDC” payment indeed attract TDS deduction.
Faced with this situation, learned counsel submits that the above sole issue is still pending before the hon’ble Supreme Court of India. We are of the considered view that mere pendency such an issue before their lordships does not entitle the assessee to prolong the hearing as are the facts involved before us. We thus uphold both the learned lower authorities respective findings treating the assessee as the assessee in default in section 201(1) proceedings in very terms.
This assessee’s appeal is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 28/07/2025. (Avdhesh Kumar Mishra) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member
Dated: 28/07/2025
*Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS*