PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, TDS, WARD- 76(3), DELHI

PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, A.M:-

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon dated 27.05.2024 for A.Y 2014-15. 2. The assessee has raised as many as 10 grounds of appeal.
However, the solitary grievance of the assessee is the action by the Assessing Officer wherein he has held that the assessee is in default u/s [A.Y. 2014-15]
201(1)/201(1A) of the Act for not having deducted TDS on external development charges “EDC” payments made to the Haryana Urban
Development Authority (HUDA).
3. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted vehemently that the impugned order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act dated 24-03-2021 has been passed by ITO, TDS Ward 76(3)-Delhi. It is the say of the ld AR that assumption of juri iction by the ITO, TDS,
Ward 76(3)-Delhi is invalid, void-ab-initio as the juri iction in the present case lies with the ITO, TDS, Ward Gurgaon.
4. The ld AR submitted that till 23-03-2008, the Registered Office of the Company was at New Delhi, which later on shifted to Gurgaon-
Haryana and the same is evident from Hon'ble Company Law Board, New
Delhi Bench vide their Order dated 29-08-2008 wherein it has approved the change of Registered Office to be situate in the State of Haryana, and accordingly MCA fee has been paid on 11-09-2008. 5. The ld. counsel for the assessee continued by saying that notice for change of Registered Office from the State of Delhi to State of Haryana was published in two leading newspapers, namely, Business
Standard {English} and Veer Arjun {Hindi} and on 29-03-2008, pursuant to which,