ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 9, NEW DELHI vs. VLCC HEALTH CARE LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4415/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 December 2021AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal. This was based on the tax effect being less than Rs. 50 lakhs, as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 78,30,906. The addition was made by the AO concerning payments to collaborators for services/premises and capital expenditure.

What were the issues?

Whether payments to collaborators were subject to TDS and whether certain expenses were capital in nature, leading to the AO's addition which was deleted by the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 194A,Section 194J

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & SH. AMIT SHUKLA

For Appellant: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
For Respondent: Ms. Sweety Kothari, CA
Hearing: 16/12/2021Pronounced: 16/12/2021

This appeal filed by the revenue is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-9, New Delhi dated 25.01.2017 for A.Y. 2010- 11. 2. The grievance of the revenue read as under :- 1. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred on facts and circumstances of the case and in law in ignoring the fact that the assessee has paid to the collaborators for expenses on services/ premises which are clearly covered under the ambit of TDS provisions.

2.

That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred on facts and circumstances of the case and in law in not appreciating the fact that the assessee did not form any partnership firm with any of the collaborators and accordingly payments made to them/ revenue shared with them cannot be treated as share of profits in the absence of partnership firm.

3.

That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred on facts and circumstances of the case and in law in ignoring the facts mentioned by the AO in the assesemnet order that some of the expenses incurred were for purchase of new assets/ for major renovation work which provide enduring benefits and are clearly capital in nature.

3. A perusal of the Assessment Order show that for the solitary grievance of the revenue the AO had made the addition of Rs.7830906/- which was deleted by the CIT(A).

4.

Therefore, the tax involved in revenue’s appeal is less than Rs. 50 lakhs, therefore, this appeal is dismissed in the light of the CBDT circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019.

5.

This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed with liberty to the revenue to approach the Tribunal as per the provisions of law, should it feel that the tax effect is more than Rs.50 lakhs.

6.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 16.12.2021 in the presence of both the rival representatives.

More judgments on Section 194A

All 1,500 judgments and leading authorities on Section 194A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →