DISTRICT PROJECT OFFICER, SERVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN,JAIPUR vs. ITO (TDS), ALWAR

यकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 84 & 85/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 cuke District Project Officer, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan, (TDS), Dholpur. Alwar. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: JPRDO3027D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri A.S. Nehra (JCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 08/01/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 10/01/2018 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the order dated 11.11.2016 and 08.09.2016 arising from the orders passed u/s 201(1)/ 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment years 2013- 14 & 2014-15 respectively. 2. These appeals by the assessee were earlier decided by this Tribunal vide order dated 30.06.2017 however, subsequently the Tribunal vide order dated 27.11.2017 in M.A. No. 121 & 122/JP/2017

ITA No. 84&85/JP/2017 District Project Officer vs ITO(TDS)

recalled the order dated 30.09.2016 for limited purpose of deciding

ground No. 1.1 which has been mentioned in the impugned order dated

27.11.2017 as ground No. 2 which reads as under:-

“1.1 The ld. CIT(A) has further erred in confirming the demand u/s 201(1) without considering that the recipient of income has included the amount so paid in its income and paid tax thereon.” This ground is a common for both the assessment year, therefore, is

being disposed off by this Composite order.

relevant material on record. So far as the other issued of applicability of

section 194C of the Income Tax Act and obligation to deduct TDS is

concerned the said issue has been decided by the Tribunal while

passing order dated 30.09.2016. Therefore, the ground no. 1 of the

assessee’s appeal stands adjudicated by the earlier orders of this

Tribunal. As far as the issue regarding the applicability of the proviso to

section 201(1) of the I.T. Act whether the recipient of the amount has

already included the amount in its income and paid tax thereupon, the

said issue requires to be verified and examined by considering the

relevant record being the return of income filed by the recipient.

Therefore, this issue is set aside to the record of the Assessing Officer

for proper verification and examination of the fact whether the recipient

ITA No. 84&85/JP/2017 District Project Officer vs ITO(TDS) of the amount in question have included the same in their income and

paid tax thereupon. Hence, in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case if in the remand proceedings the AO finds

that the recipient of the amount has already included the same in their return of income then there is no liability of the assessee u/s 201(1) of

the Income Tax Act, however the Assessing Officer has to restrict the liability of the assessee u/s 201(1A) towards interest only.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 10/01/2018

Sd/- Sd/- ¼Hkkxpan ½ ¼fot; iky jko½ (Bhagchand) (Vijay Pal Rao) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 10/01/2018. *Santosh. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- District Project Officer, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan, Dholpur. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO(TDS), Alwar. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत. 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File {ITA No. 84 & 85/JP/2017} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत 3