ACIT (TDS), NOIDA vs. M/S. G.L. BAJAJ INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY & MANAGEMENT, GREATER NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 306/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 January 20164 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 dismissed the Department's appeal because the tax effect was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015. The circular mandates that appeals with a tax effect below Rs. 10,00,000 should not be filed or pressed.

What were the facts?

The Department appealed the CIT(A)'s order deleting a demand for short TDS and interest. The CIT(A) had applied Section 194C for vehicle hiring, while the Department argued for Section 194-I.

What were the issues?

Whether the Department's appeal is maintainable given the tax effect below the CBDT's monetary limit for appeals to the Tribunal. The applicability of Section 194C versus Section 194-I for TDS on vehicle hiring was also an issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 194C,Section 194-I

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI

This appeal by the Department is directed against the Order dated 14.10.2013 of Ld. CIT(A), Noida pertaining to assessment year 2009-10 on the following grounds:- “

1. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the demand raised by AO on account of short deduction as well as interest charged thereon by following the orders of ITAT in the case of M/s Kothari International School in dated 13.01.2012 and Apeejay School in ITA No. 5887 & 5888/Del/2010 dated 01.03.2011, ignoring the fact that the department has not accepted the said decisions of the Ld. ITAT and further appeal has been filed by the department in the High Court.

2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the demand of short charge and interest thereon and in directing that provisions contained in section 194C is applicable on the payment made by assessee for hiring of vehicles, ignoring the fact of the case that the deductor company is liable to deduct the tax u/s 194-1 at the rate of 10% for hiring of taxies in view of ami- ndment made u/s 194-1 w.e.f, 01.06.2017.

3. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the demand of short charge and interest then on without appreciating the fact that the hired vehicles were covered under the definition of plant as per provisions of section 43(3) and accordingly the TDS was deductible as per provision of section 194-I at the prescribed rate, instead of section 194C as held by Ld. CIT(A) after the insertion of amended provisions in the section 194-1 w.e.f, 13.07.2006.”

2.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. From the above, we find that the tax effect in the Revenue’s Appeal is less than Rs.10,00,000/-, therefore, the Department’s Appeal is not maintainable, in view of the Circular No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015 issued vide F.No. 279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt.) by the CBDT. For the sake of convenience, the relevant para nos. 3 & 10 of the aforesaid CBDT’s Circular are reproduced as under:- “3. Henceforth, appeals/ SLPs shall not be filed in cases where the tax effect does not exceed the monetary limits given hereunder: Monetary Limit S No Appeals in Income-tax matters (in Rs) 1 Before Appellate Tribunal 10,00,000/- 2 Before High Court 20,00,000/- 3 Before Supreme Court 25,00,000/- It is clarified that an appeal should not be filed merely because the tax effect in a case exceeds the monetary limits prescribed above. Filing of appeal in such cases is to be decided on merits of the case.

10.

This instruction will apply retrospectively to pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in High Courts/ Tribunals. Pending appeals below the specified tax limits in para 3 above may be withdrawn/ not pressed. Appeals before the Supreme Court will be governed by the instructions on this subject, operative at the time when such appeal was filed.”

3.

It is not in dispute that the Board’s instruction or directions issued to the income-tax authorities are binding on those authorities, therefore, the Department should have withdrawn/ not pressed the present Appeal, in view of the aforesaid instructions since the tax effect in the instant Appeal is less than the amount of Rs. 10 lacs, prescribed in the above said CBDT’s Instructions.

4.

Keeping in view the CBDT Instruction No. 21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015, we are of the view that the Revenue should have withdrawn/ not pressed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. We are also of the view that the said Instructions are applicable for the pending appeals and appeals to be filed henceforth in Tribunal. Accordingly, the Revenue’s Appeal is dismissed. 5. In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue Stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 08/1/2016.

More judgments on Section 194C

All 2,696 judgments and leading authorities on Section 194C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →