M/S. JAYPEE INFRATECH LTD.,NOIDA vs. DCIT (TDS), NOIDA

At the outset Ld. Counsel submitted that this issue has been decided against the assessee by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case vide order dated 31.8.2017 passed in and 3845 of 2015. However the Tribunal has directed the AO to give assessee an opportunity in terms of proviso to section 201(1) to show that if the recipient of the income has filed their return of income disclosing the lease rent and paid the tax payable by them, then no disallowance should be made.

Ld. DR too admitted that the issue involved are covered against the assessee.

After considering the aforesaid submission, we find that the similar matter was involved in the Asstt. Year 2011-12 and 2013-14. This Tribunal after detailed discussion has held that assessee was required to deduct tax u/s 194 I on the rent paid and also on the interest paid, TDS was required to be deducted u/s 194A. The Tribunal has directed the AO after observing and holding as under:- “Now we come to the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 and 2013-14. In both these appeals the assessee has challenged short deduction of tax on rent payment of Rs. 44067/- and Rs. 43948/- respectively u/s 194 (1) of the Act. These payments are pertaining to lease rent paid to Yamuna Development Authority. The issue is squarely covered in favour of the Revenue by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court as discussed in ground No. 1 of the appeal of the Revenue in appeals of the Jaypee Sports International Ltd. Therefore, as the issue is squarely covered in favour of the Revenue we dismissed both these appeals of the assessee. However, it is made amply clear that proviso to section 201 of the Act is beneficial and applies retrospectively as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court we direct the Assessing Officer to grant the benefit of the same if assessee provides requisite details.”