EIH LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the receipt of tips by an employee from a customer is not a direct consequence of the contract of employment. Therefore, it falls outside the purview of Section 192, and the assessee cannot be held in default for not deducting TDS on these tips.
What were the facts?
The assessee, EIH Ltd., was in appeal against an order related to TDS. The core issue was whether the assessee was liable to deduct TDS under Section 192 on credit tips recovered from hotel guests.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the applicability of Section 192 for TDS deduction on credit tips received by hotel employees from customers. The Tribunal also considered whether the assessee was in default under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 192,Section 15,Section 17,Section 201(1),Section 201(1A)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- ITC Ltd. v. CIT(TDS)3 citing68 Taxmann.com 323 · 2016 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC-II”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI P.K.BANSAL
Assessee by : Shri Khirendra Mohan Gupta, CA Department by : Shri S.K. Mishra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 11/07/2016 Date of pronouncement 12/07/2016 O R D E R
This appeal has been filed by the assesee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 11.11.2014.
Assessee even though has taken as many as seven grounds of appeal but the only issue involved in the ground taken by the assessee is whether the assessee was liable to deduct TDS under the provision of section 192 on the credit tips recovered from the hotel guest.
After giving the rival submission and going through the orders of the authorities below this issue in my opinion is no more res-integra in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case ITC Ltd. vs. CIT(TDS) 68 Taxman.Com 323 (SC) in which the Supreme Court held that contract of employment not being proximate cause for receipt of tips by employee from a customer, same would be outside dragnet of section 15 and 17 u/s 201(1A), interest can only be levied when the person if declared as an assessee in default. The assessee’s liability in the present case are outside section 192. Therefore it can not hold assessee to be in default. In view of the said decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, I quash the order of the AO passed u/s 201(1) / u/s 201(1A).
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 12/07/2016.
More judgments on Section 192
- Sbi, (Erstwhile Sbbj), Baran vs ITO (TDS), KotaITA 143/JPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Rushikant Jaywantrao Shinde, Mumbai vs DCIT, Circle 20(1), MumbaiITA 2019/MUM/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- Jayamma, Shivamogga vs Income Tax Officer Ward 1, ShivamoggaITA 1268/BANG/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Jayamma, Shivamogga vs Income Tax Officer Ward 1, ShivamoggaITA 1267/BANG/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Banshidhar Enterprises, Main Road, Charhi… vs ITO Ward 1(1) Hazaribagh, HazaribaghITA 134/RAN/2026[2017-2018]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2017-2018
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Fasil Hussain Shah vs. Ut Of J And K Th Commissioner Secretary TO Government Finance Department And OthersJammu and Kashmir and Ladakh · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S. Devkinandan Traders vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Dixit Medical Agencies vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Sukant Kumar vs. Union Of INDIA And 6 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026