MAPSKO BUILDERS PVT LTD vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OSD CIRCLE 75 1 TDS, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 186 / 2025HC Delhi30 May 20252 pages
For Petitioner: VED KUMAR JAIN
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the issue was concluded against the assessee by its prior decision in Puri Construction (P.) Ltd. v. Additional CIT. Therefore, no substantial question of law arose for consideration.

What were the facts?

The appellant (assessee) was faulted for not deducting TDS on External Development Charges (EDC) paid to HUDA. The assessee contended that no TDS was required on such payments.

What were the issues?

Whether TDS is deductible on payments of External Development Charges (EDC) to HUDA. Whether the appeal raises a substantial question of law when the issue is covered by a previous High Court decision.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 201(1)/201(1A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 186/2025 MAPSKO BUILDERS PVT LTD .....Appellant Through: Mr Ved Jain with Mr Nischay Kantoor, Advocates. versus JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OSD CIRCLE 75 1 TDS, NEW DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr Siddhartha Sinha, SSC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA O R D E R % 30.05.2025 CM APPL. 35938/2025 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. The application is disposed of. ITA 186/2025 3. The appellant [Assessee] has filed the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] impugning an order dated 30.01.2025 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [ITAT] in ITA No.3340/Del/2024 in respect of Assessment Year [AY] 2014-15. The Assessee had preferred the aforementioned appeal against an order dated 17.05.2024 passed under Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Gurgaon [CIT(A)]. The appellant was faulted for not deducting TDS from External Development This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 11:49:50

Charges [EDC], Haryana Urban Development Authority [HUDA]. 4. According to the Assessee, no TDS was required to be paid on payments of EDC. The ITAT had found that the said issue was concluded against the Assessee by the decision of this court in Puri Construction (P.) Ltd. v. Additional CIT: (2024) 159 taxmann.com 444 Delhi. 5. The Assessee has projected the several questions of law. However, no question of law arises for consideration of this court as the same are covered by the decision of this court in Puri Construction (supra). 6. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. VIBHU BAKHRU, J TEJAS KARIA, J MAY 30, 2025/tr Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 11:49:50

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →