ACIT TDS, NOIDA vs. M/S JAYPEE INFRATECH LTD., NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5449/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 August 2018AY 2014-154 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal followed a co-ordinate bench's decision which held that authorities constituted by a State Act are entitled to exemption from TDS under Section 194A. Therefore, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of demand for interest on deferred payment of EDC lease premium. The assessee argued that a co-ordinate bench had already decided this issue in their favor for earlier assessment years.

What were the issues?

Whether interest paid on deferred lease premium by the assessee to a State-constituted authority is subject to TDS under Section 194A.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 194A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, & SHRI KULDIP SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar Garg, Adv
Hearing: 30.08.2018Pronounced: 31.08.2018

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER,

1.

This appeal by the Revenue is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] - 1, Noida dated 14.05.2015, pertaining to assessment year 2014-15.

2.

The solitary grievance of the Revenue is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the demand on account of payment of interest on deferred payment of EDC lease premium u/s 194A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short] ignoring the fact that the payment made by the assessee to YEIDA under the head interest cannot be merely nomenclature of EDC owing to the fact that these are uniformly and periodically made payments.

3.

At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that an identical issue was considered by the co- ordinate bench while deciding appeal for assessment years 2012-13 & 2013-14 in assessee’s own case and has decided the issue in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

4.

The ld. DR could not bring any distinguishing decision in favour of the Revenue.

5.

We have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. We find force in the contention of the ld. AR. The co-ordinate bench was seized with a similar issue in assessment years 2012-13 & 2013-14. The relevant finding of the co-ordinate bench is as under:

“19. The ld. DR could not show any other contrary decision. In the above decision, the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court while deciding the issue on payment of interest to Noida has held that the authorities constituted by the State Act are entitled to exemption of payment of tax at source u/s 194A of the Act. Similarly, in the case of the assessee a State Act also constituted the recipient. In the result, Ground No. 2 of the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.”

6.

Respectfully following the findings of the co-ordinate bench, we decline to interfere. Ground No. 1 raised by the Revenue stands dismissed.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in is dismissed.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 31.08.2018.

More judgments on Section 194A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →