DCIT, GURGAON vs. M/S. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2299/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 June 20183 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 the assessee was not required to deduct tax at source on discount and roaming charges. Therefore, the Revenue's grounds were dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which did not treat the assessee in default for non-deduction of TDS. The assessee argued that the issue was covered by a previous Tribunal order in its own case.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was in default for not deducting TDS on discount and roaming charges, and if the CIT(A) erred in not treating the assessee as such.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 201(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH,

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

For Appellant: Shri Ankit B. Agrawal, CA
Hearing: 11.06.2018Pronounced: 11.06.2018

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER,

1.

This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - Rohtak dated 03.02.2015 pertaining to assessment year 2011-12.

2.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the Revenue is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in not treating the assessee in default within the provisions of section 201(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'.

3.

At the very outset, the ld. AR stated that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y 2010-11.

4.

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

5.

We have carefully considered the orders of the authorities below. We find force in the contention of the ld. AR. An identical issue was considered by the Tribunal in and ITA No. 941/DEL/2015. The relevant findings of the co-ordinate bench read as under:

“13. As appeal of the revenue are on issue of certain deduction of CIT(A) about applicability of decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, when we have already held that assessee was not required to deduct tax at source on discount and roaming charges, the appeal of the revenue becomes infructuous in absence of any TDS liability and hence appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

14.

In result, for A.Y. 2010-11 and ITA No. 2382/DEL/2015 for A.Y. 2011-12 filed by assessee are allowed. ITA No. 852/DEL/2015 for A.Y. 2010-11 filed by the Revenue is dismissed.”

6.

Respectfully following the findings of the co-ordinate bench, we decline to interfere. Grounds raised by the Revenue stand dismissed.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in is dismissed.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 11.06.2018.

More judgments on Section 201(1)

All 3,835 judgments and leading authorities on Section 201(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →