ACIT, CIRCLE-31, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RAHEE JHAJHARIA E TO E JV, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1848/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 December 2017AY 2013-144 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that credit for TDS can only be granted in the assessment year for which the income on which TDS was deducted is assessable. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s order allowing the credit was against the provisions of the Act.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a joint venture, received a mobilization advance on which TDS was deducted. The assessee did not offer this advance to tax in the impugned assessment year. The Assessing Officer disallowed the TDS credit, but the CIT(A) allowed it by relying on a High Court judgment.

What were the issues?

Whether TDS credit for a mobilization advance, not offered to tax in the current year, can be allowed. The applicability of Section 199 and Rule 37BA(3) regarding the timing of TDS credit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 199

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, AM ]

Hearing: 14.11.2017Pronounced: 21.12.2017

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A No. 1848/Kol/2017
C.O. No. 115/Kol/2017

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

ORDER This appeal by the Revenue and the Cross objection by the assessee are directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata [ in short the ld CITA] dated 24.05.2017 which was passed against the order passed by the ACIT, Circle-31, Kolkata [ in short the ld AO] under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 02.02.2016 for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

C.O.115/Kol/2017 Rahee Jhajharia E to E (JV) A.Yr.2013-14 2. The assessee is an AOP and is a joint venture of M/s Rahee Infratech Ltd. and M/s Jhajharia Nirman Private Ltd., both having 50% profit sharing ratio. During the impugned financial year, the assessee JV was engaged in the business of construction of road bed, Bridge, supply of Truck/Rails, Track installation, Signaling and Telecom and Overhead Electrification and associated equipment. The issue before us is whether the Ld. CIT(A) was right in allowing credit of TDS of Rs. 12,96,167/- deducted from the payment of mobilization advance by M/s Moser Baer Construction Pvt. Ltd. Admittedly, the mobilization advance was not offered to tax during the impugned assessment year. The Assessing officer held that as per provision of Section 199 of the Act, credited of TDS made on mobilization advance cannot be allowed in the current year. The Ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee by applying the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Central vs. Elsamex TWS-SNC(JV) had held that the mobilization advance was not an income as it was granted against the bank guarantee and was interest bearing. Since, the TDS was deducted on an amount that was not taxable, it is not the fault of the assessee and hence, the assessee is entitled to credit of Rs. 12,96,197/-. Aggrieved the revenue is in appeal before us on the following ground: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in allowing the credit of TDs of Rs. 12,96,167/- deducted towards Mobilization Advance recovered by M/s Moser Baer Construction Pvt. Ltd.

3.

The assessee filed cross objection. The effective ground read as follows: 2. For that at least Credit for TDS of Rs. 3,86,300/- (2% of 1,93,14,989/-) recovered Mobilization Advances by Moser Baer Construction Pvt. Ltd. be directed to be allowed in assessment year 2013-14 & balance of Rs. 9,09,867/- (12,96,167/- - 3,86,300/-) be directed to be allowed in assessment year 2014-15. 2

C.O.115/Kol/2017 Rahee Jhajharia E to E (JV) A.Yr.2013-14

4.

After hearing rival submissions, I held as follows: Section 199(3) read as follows: “The Board may, for the purposes of giving credit in respect of tax deducted or tax paid in terms of the provisions of this Chapter, make such rules as may be necessary, including the rules for the purposes of giving credit to a person other than those referred to in sub-section (1) and sub- section (2) and also the assessment year for which such credit may be given.”

Rule 37BA(3)(i) and (ii) of Income Tax Rules, 1962 read as follows: (i) Credit for tax deducted at source and paid to the Central Government, shall be given for the assessment year for which such income is assessable. (ii) Where tax has been deducted at source and paid to the Central Government and the income is assessable over a number of years, credit for tax deducted at source shall be allowed across those years in the same proportion in which the income is assessable to tax.

5.

The Act and Rules referred above are clear that credit of TDS can be granted only in the year in which the income/receipt on which such tax deducted at source is assessable to tax. Thus, in my view the order of Ld. CIT(A) is against the provision of the Act. Hence, the same is reversed and the appeal of the revenue is allowed.

6.

Coming to the cross objection the claim of the assessee is in accordance with Section 199 read with Rule 37BA(3) of the Act. The assessing officer directed to grant credit as per law to the assessee in the year which mobilization receipt is offered to tax as income.

C.O.115/Kol/2017 Rahee Jhajharia E to E (JV) A.Yr.2013-14 7. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off as above.

Order pronounced in the Court on 21.12.2017

More judgments on Section 199

All 535 judgments and leading authorities on Section 199 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →