GLORIOUS INFORMATICS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 10(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2493/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 December 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Year:2016-17) Glorious Informatics Vs. ITO, Ward 10(1) Private Limited C.R Building, IP Estate H-334, Ground Floor, New Delhi – 110002 New Rajender Nagar, New Delhi 110060 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AADCG1178P Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Prince Bansal, CA Respondent by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 12.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 12.12.2025 Page 2 Glorious I3 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the issue was covered by a decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, rendering the grounds raised by the assessee without substance.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order upholding the AO's finding that TDS was not deducted on payments made to HUDA for External Development Charges. The AO alleged TDS was required under Section 194C of the Act.

What were the issues?

Whether TDS was required to be deducted on payments made for External Development Charges to Haryana Urban Development Authority under Section 194C of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 201(1),Section 201(1A),Section 194C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, DELHI

Before: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

Hearing: 12.11.2025Pronounced: 12.12.2025

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 12.02.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax/Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order No : ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1073173838(1) arising out of the order dated 30.11.2022 passed u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the ITO, TDS Ward-43(3), Delhi for AY: 2016-17.

2.

Heard and perused the records. The issue involves is the payment raised by holding the assessee in default for non deduction of TDS on the External Development Charges (in short ‘EDC’) payment made to Haryana Urban Development Authority (in short ‘HUDA’) for which AO has alleged that TDS was required to be deducted in accordance with provisions of Section 194C of the Act. The Ld. Counsel submitted that issue has not been appreciated by Ld. CIT(A), however, we find that the issue is completely covered against the assessee by decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the Glorious Informatics Pvt. Ltd. (AY: 2016-17) case of Puri Construction (P.) Ltd. vs. Addl.CIT (2024) 159 taxmann.com 444 and the ground raised have no substance. The appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 12.12.2025

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 →