Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed an order for Assessment Year 2017-18, concerning proceedings under section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee's grievance was that it was held in default for not deducting TDS on external development charges paid to HUDA, which were treated as contractual payments. The assessee did not appear for the hearing.
Held
The Tribunal noted a jurisdictional high court's decision which held that such 'EDC' payments attract TDS deduction. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' findings treating the assessee in default under section 201(1).
Key Issues
Whether external development charges paid to HUDA are subject to TDS deduction as contractual payments.
Sections Cited
201(1A), 194C, 201(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara&
ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Vadodara’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025–26/1076689930(1) dated 04.06.2025, in proceedings u/s 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
Suffice to say, the assessee’s sole substantive grievance raised in the instant twin appeals challenges both the learned lower authorities respective findings holding it as the assessee in default for not having deducted TDS on payment of external
We notice in this precise factual backdrop that hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s decision in Puri Constructions (P) Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (2024) 159 taxmann.com 441 (Del.) has already settled the above sole issue against the assessee and in the department’s favour that such are “EDC” payment indeed attracts TDS deduction. We thus uphold both the learned lower authorities’ respective findings treating as the assessee in default in section 201(1) proceedings in very terms.