M/S MARVEL OMEGA BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS-1), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 814/PUN/2023Status: HeardITAT Pune02 August 2023AY 2017-188 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessees failed to provide necessary records and evidence to substantiate their claim that the payees had offered the income to tax. The assessees' contention was rejected for want of corresponding evidence.

What were the facts?

Four companies appealed against TDS demands and interest levied under sections 201(1) and 201(1A). The assessees did not dispute their liability to deduct TDS but claimed the payees had already offered the income to tax.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessees are liable for TDS demands and interest when the payees have offered the income to tax, and if the assessees provided sufficient evidence for this claim.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 201(1),Section 201(1A),Section 194A,Section 194C,Section 194I,Section 194J

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

Hearing: 02.08.2023Pronounced: 02.08.2023

ITA.No.815/PUN./2023 Assessment Years 2017-2018 M/s. Marvel Sigma Homes Private Ltd., 4th Floor, Above The Income Tax Officer, IDBI Bank, Arthavishwa (TDS-1), Shankarsheth vs., Bldg., Lane No.5, Koregaon Road, Swargate, Pune. Park, Pune – 411 001. PIN – 411 037. Maharashtra. Maharashtra PAN AAGCM6007Q (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of Hearing : 02.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 02.08.2023 ORDER PER BENCH :

These four assessees’ as many appeals ITA.Nos.812 to 815/PUN./2023, for assessment year 2017-18, arise against the CIT(A), Pune-11, Pune’s separate Din and Order Nos.ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1052743778(1), 10527433356(1), 1052744164(1), 1052744632(1), all dated 11.05.2023, involving proceedings u/s. 201 (1) r.w.s.201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

All four cases called twice. None appears at these assessees’ behest. They are accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from Revenue side that all these four assessees’ viz., M/s. Marvel Edge Realtors Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Marvel Landmarks Private Ltd., M/s. Marvel Omega Builders

3 ITA.Nos.812 to 815/PUN./2023 Private Ltd., and M/s. Marvel Sigma Homes Private Ltd., corresponding four appeals ITA.Nos.812 to 815/PUN./2023 seek to reverse both the lower authorities identical action raising sec.201 r.w.s. 201(1A) TDS and interest demands of Rs.10,23,214/- ; Rs.88,29,905/-; Rs.2,70,20,276/-; and Rs.1,48,89,981/-; case-wise, respectively.

3.

Mr. Murkunde invited our attention to the NFAC’s identical detailed discussion in the “lead” appeal ITA.No.812/PUN./2023 reading as under :

4 ITA.Nos.812 to 815/PUN./2023 5 ITA.Nos.812 to 815/PUN./2023 6 ITA.Nos.812 to 815/PUN./2023 7 ITA.Nos.812 to 815/PUN./2023

4.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessees’ identical pleadings raising the sole substantive grievance of correctness of sec.201(1) r.w.s.201(1A) demands and Revenue’s vehement arguments supporting the same at length. We find from a perusal of the case files that all these assessees are fair enough in not disputing their very liability to deduct TDS u/secs.194A, 194C, 194I and 194J paid in F.Y. 2016-2017 relevant to A.Y. 2017-18; as the case may be, involving varying sums, to the recipients concerned. Their only ground before us is that the payees concerned have offered the same to tax and therefore, they duly stand assessed. We are afraid to accept the assessees’ instant sole substantive contention for want of the corresponding records and evidence emanating from the case files. We make it clear that although the legislature has diluted the provisions of the impugned TDS recovery mechanism u/secs.201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) subject to only to the condition that it is incumbent for the “assessee(s) – in-default” to file the relevant details to this effect going by sec.201(1) first proviso introduced in the Act vide Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 01.07.2012. This is indeed coupled with the fact that the learned lower authorities have also rejected the 8 ITA.Nos.812 to 815/PUN./2023 assessees’ contention for the very reason only as it is evident from the NFAC’s above extracted detailed discussion. We thus see no merit in these assessees’ identical sole substantive grievance. The same stands rejected. Ordered accordingly.

5.

These four assessees’ as many appeals are dismissed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 02.08.2023.

More judgments on Section 201(1)

All 3,835 judgments and leading authorities on Section 201(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →