TV TODAY NETWORK LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3073/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 November 2021AY 2011-125 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal dismissed the disallowance related to TDS on interest to Prasar Bharti, following a coordinate bench decision. For leave encashment, the tribunal directed the AO to allow deduction on an actual payment basis as per the Apex Court ruling, partly allowing the ground.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order disallowing Rs. 19,53,159/- for non-deduction of TDS on interest to Prasar Bharti and Rs. 1,02,21,533/- for leave encashment. The assessee relied on a previous tribunal order in its own case.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS on interest to Prasar Bharti is justified and whether leave encashment deduction should be on accrual or actual payment basis.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Appellant: Shri Shaliesh Gupta, CA
For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR
Hearing: 09.11.2021Pronounced: 09.11.2021

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-

1.

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] - 15, New Delhi dated 28.02.2017 pertaining to assessment year 2011-12.

2.

Grievance No. 1 alongwith its sub-grounds relates to the disallowance of Rs. 19,53,159/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'The Act'] on account of non deduction of TDS on interest payable to Prasar Bharti.

3.

Ground No. 2 with its sub-grounds relates to the disallowance of Rs. 1,02,21,533/- towards leave encashment in light of provisions of Section 43B(f) of the Act.

4.

At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the order of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case in pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13 wherein this Tribunal has considered a similar disallowance. The counsel prayed for similar decision.

5.

Per contra, the ld. DR did not raise any objection in following the order of the coordinate bench.

6.

We have carefully considered the orders of the authorities below.

We find force in the contention of the ld. counsel. The co-ordinate bench in assessee’s own case [supra] had the occasion to consider similar disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act on account of non-deduction of TDS on interest payable to Prasar Bharati qua Ground No. 1. We find that this issue has been decided against the assessee and in favour of the revenue.

Therefore, respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench Ground No. 1 with sub-grounds is dismissed.

7.

In so far as Ground No. 2 with sub-grounds is concerned, the coordinate bench has held as under:

“7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. As regards Ground No. 1, 1.1 & 1.2, the same is covered against the assessee, hence, dismissed. As regards Ground No.2, 2.1, 2.2 & 2.3 relating to disallowance towards leave encashment in lieu of provisions of Section 43B (f) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Exide Industries (Supra) held that the claim with regard to leave encashment has to be allowed on cash basis i.e. actual payment basis and not on accrual basis. It is pertinent to note that the payments with regards to the leave encashment have been made in subsequent assessment year i.e. 2013-14 and thus, we direct the Assessing Officer to verify and allow the deduction u/s 43B on actual payment basis as held in the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice. Hence, Ground No. 2, 2.1 2.2 & 2.3 are partly allowed.”

8.

Respectfully following the findings of the coordinate bench, we give similar directions to the Assessing Officer. Ground No. 2 is allowed for statistical purposes.

9.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in is allowed in part for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 09.11.2021.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →