AMIT KUMAR MAHESHWARI,BADAUN vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), BADAUN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8659/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 July 2022AY 2012-133 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 appeal had become infructuous due to the assessee opting for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. Therefore, the appeal was treated as withdrawn and dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2012-13. The assessee later opted for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme (VSVS), and the Designated Authority issued Form-5. The appeal was subsequently treated as withdrawn.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal had become infructuous due to the assessee opting for the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme. The underlying dispute concerned the applicability of Section 194C and Section 40(a)(ia) regarding disallowance for non-deduction of TDS.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 194C,Section 40(a)(ia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI

ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM: (A) This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Moradabad [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 28.08.2019 for Assessment Year 2012-13.

Grounds taken in this appeal of Assessee are as under:

“1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the grounds that copy of ledger account of the Incentives paid to the payees is not furnished. These copy of account of the payees were neither demanded by the Assessing Officer nor Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).

Amit Kumar Maheshwari vs. ITO 2. That the details in the shape of list of payment to various retailers who recharge the pre-paid mobile Sim was furnished before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to which she has accepted. In which amount of the payment to any individual/ payee was not exceeding Rs. 30,000/- in single payment or Rs. 75,000/- in aggregate in the year u/s 194C. Therefore the disallowance confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax appeals is arbitrary, unjustified, illegal and against the facts & circumstances of the case u/s 40(a)(ia).

3.

That the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of Income-tax Act are applicable, if TDS is payable or assessee is liable to pay as per section 194C of Income-tax Act, 1961, If the prescribed amount is exceeded u/s 194C.

4.

These are not the contractors, these are retailers who recharge the prepaid mobile sim to whom incentives is given by the company through the dealers. Thus they are not the contractors and provisions of section 194C are not applicable.

5.

That the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is biased, who has not applied his/her mind to the issue which was for his/her consideration whether TDS is deductible or not. Therefore order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is unjust, illegal and also arbitrary.”

(B) The assessee, vide letter dated 20.06.2022, submitted that the assessee has opted for Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 (“VSVS”, for short) and that the Designated Authority has already issued Form-5 under VSVS. A copy of Form-5 issued by the Designated Authority was also enclosed with the aforesaid letter; and the assessee applied for withdrawal of appeal. The ld. Senior Departmental Representative for Revenue submitted before us, at the time of hearing, that the appeal has become infructuous in view of the assessee opting for VSVS; and that the appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn. After due consideration and in view of the Amit Kumar Maheshwari vs. ITO foregoing, we are of the opinion that this appeal has become infructuous on account of aforesaid VSVS, and that this appeal may be treated as withdrawn on account of the aforesaid VSVS.

Accordingly, this appeal having become infructuous, is treated as withdrawn and is hereby dismissed.

(B.1) Before we part, we hereby clarify, by way of abundant caution, that if for some reason the disputes under this appeal before us are not settled under the aforesaid VSVS, then the assessee will be at liberty to approach ITAT for restoration of this appeal in accordance with law.

(C) In the result, this appeal is dismissed.

This order was already pronounced orally on 6th July, 2022 in Open Court. Now this order in writing is signed today on 07.07.2022.

More judgments on Section 194C

All 2,696 judgments and leading authorities on Section 194C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →