DCIT, CIRCLE-76-1, DELHI vs. MS PVR, DELHI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI
Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY
PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JM:
The instant appeals, preferred by the Revenue, are directed against separate orders of the Ld. CIT(A)-23, New Delhi, all dated 01.05.2024 for A.Yrs. 2013-14,
2014-15 & 2015-16 respectively whereby he deleted the additions made by the AO under Section(s) 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) on account of short deduction of TDS on payment of CAM charges. Facts in all cases are identical (excepting quantum of addition), therefore, the same were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.
2. Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee at the outset submitted that the issue involved for adjudication in the instant appeals is squarely covered by the order of Coordinate Bench in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2011-12 & 2012-13 rendered in ITA Nos. 7290/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2011-12) and ITA No. 202/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2012-
13) dated 09.02.2023, holding that payment of CAM charges is governed by Section 194C, thus not liable to deduct TDS @ 10% under Section 194-I. He submitted that the impugned orders of Ld. CIT(A) being in consonance with the aforesaid decision of the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT, require no interference.
3. Ld. DR could not controvert the aforesaid factual position. She, however, relied on the orders passed by the AO and submitted that the Revenue has not given up its stand.
We have heard the submissions made on behalf of the parties and perused the material available on record. It is seen that the Coordinate Bench in assessee’s own case rendered in ITA Nos. 7290/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2011-12) & ITA No. 202/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2012-13) vide order dated 09.02.2023 has decided the impugned issue by observing as under:
“6. The undisputed fact in this case is that while the lease rentals are paid based on a fixed percentage on the net revenue, the CAM charges are based on the per sq. ft. area. The observation of the Ld. CIT(A) is that the rent by any name, lease, sub-lease, tenancy or the reliance on the judgment wherein the services are intrapolated into the rent stand on a different pedestal. In the Instant case, the determination of the rent or CAM are separate and the CAM arrangements are not essential and an integral part for use of the premises. While there are no expenses incurred against the rent except for general building maintenance and municipal charges, the CAM Involves employment of separate staff and separate operations involved on day to day basis. Hence, we hold that the provisions for rent are governed by Section 194I and CAM charges by section 194C of the Act. The AO is directed to re- compute the CAM charges, taking into consideration the two sections mentioned above."
Undisputedly the facts of the case for the impugned assessment years are identical to A.Y. 2011-12 & 2012-13. In these years also the payment is in respect of Common Area Maintenance (CAM) Charge in the mall in which the assessee has leased property. The order of Ld. First Appellate Authority being in conformity with the earlier order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case we see no reason to interfere with the same. Thus, the present appeals preferred by the Revenue are devoid of any force and are liable to be dismissed. We order accordingly. 6. Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos. 3109, 3110 & 3111/Del/2024 for A. Yrs. 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 are dismissed. Order pronounced in open court on 09.04.2025. (SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 20.06.2025. *MP*