News Update

ST - Amendment made to FA, 1994 on 14.05.2015 making service tax applicable retrospectively on chit-fund business is only prospective - Refund payable of tax paid between 01.07.2012 to 13.05.2015: HCST - SVLDRS, 2019 - Amnesty Scheme, being of the nature of an exemption from the requirement to pay the actual tax due to the government, have to be considered strictly in favour of the revenue: HCCX - Issue involved is valuation of goods u/r 10A of CE Valuation Rules, 2000 - Appeal lies before Supreme Court: HCCus - Smuggling - A person carrying any article on his belonging would be presumed to be aware of the contents of the articles being carried by him: HCCus - Penalty that could be imposed for smuggling 3.2 kg of gold was Rs.88.40 lakhs, being the value of gold, but what is imposed is Rs.10 lakhs - Penalty not at all disproportionate: HCCus - Keeping in mind the balance of convenience and irreparable injury which may be caused to Revenue, importer to continue indemnity bond of 115 crore and possession of confiscated diamonds to remain with department: HCCus - OIA was passed in October 2022 remanding the matter to adjudicating authority but matter not yet disposed of - Six weeks' time granted to dispose proceedings: HCI-T - High Court need not intervene in matter involving factual issues; petitioner may utilise option of appeal: HCChina asks Blinken to select between cooperation or confrontationI-T - Unexplained cash credit - additions u/s 68 unsustainable where based on conjecture & surmise alone: ITATHonda to set up USD 11 bn EV plant in CanadaI-T - Re-assessment is invalid where based only on a suspicion that income escaped assessment & where not based on concrete reasons to believe for commencing such proceedings : ITATImran Khan banned from flaying State InstitutionsI-T - Income from sale of flats cannot be computed in assessee's hands, where legal possession of flats had not been handed over to buyers in that particular AY: ITATPro-Palestine demonstration spreads across US universities; 100 arrestedI-T - Investment activities in venture capital which are not covered in negative list under Schedule III to SEBI Regulations, qualifies for deduction u/s 10(23FB): ITATNATO asks China to stop backing Russia if keen to forge close ties with WestCus - When Department has not complied with time limit, the order issued for revocation of licence or order issued for continuation of suspension licence cannot sustain: CESTATNY top court quashes conviction of Harvey Weinstein in rape caseWeather prediction normal for phase 2 poll dayIndiGo orders 30 Airbus A350s for long haulsST - Appellant is an 'authorised medical practitioner' providing 'healthcare services' - services exempted in terms of clause 2(i) of notification 25/2012-ST: Commr(A)RBI to issue fresh guidelines for banks to freeze suspected bank accounts being used for cyber crimesREC avails SACE-Covered Green Loan for 60.5 Billion Japanese YenStudy finds Coca-Cola accounts for 11% of branded plastic pollution worldwideCus - 'Small Form-factor Pluggable Optical Transceivers' are classifiable under CTH 8517 7090 and not under CTH 8517 62 90 - entitled for benefit of duty concession under 57/2017-Cus: CESTATDoNER discusses Development of Tourism in North EastCX - Appellant is eligible for exemption under Notfn 12/2012-CE upon fulfilling all conditions stipulated therein, thus sufficiently establishing that goods dealt with by Appellants qualify for exemption: CESTAT
 
I-T - Claim of wrong presumption regarding status of payee will not earn reprieve for payer for default committed in withholding tax liability: ITAT

 

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI , MAR 20, 2018: THE issue is - Whether mere presumption regarding status of Noida Authority as "Local Authority" will absolve payer from his negligence in not withholding TDS on payment of lease rent to Noida Authority. NO IS THE ANSWER.

Facts of the case:

The Assessee i.e., NOIDA SEZ Authority, had made payment of lease rent to Noida Authority during the relevant year, on which no TDS was deducted u/s 194-I. The AO therefore passed orders u/s 201(1) / 201(1A) for non-deduction of tax and also initiated the penalty proceedings. The assessee submitted before A.O. the details with explanatory note that TDS deduction was not applicable in the case of Noida Authority. The AO was however of the view that "Noida Authority was not exempt u/s 10(20) as it was not Local Authority." The AO therefore, held that assessee had no reasonable cause for non-deduction of TDS on the payments of lease rent paid to Noida Authority. He also levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for all A.Ys vide separate orders.

On appeal, the FAA noted that there was no dispute regarding not deduction of tax on the amounts paid as lease rent to Noida Authority. In response, the assessee submitted that this lapse happened because of the claim of Noida Authority that it was not liable for deduction of tax at source. The FAA did not accept this contention because the deductee could not influence the deductor in not following the law.

Tribunal held that,

++ the provision of Section 273B provides that penalty need not be imposed on the person or the assessee as the case may be for failure to deduct TDS, if the assessee proves that there was a reasonable cause for the said failure. The AO in the order u/s 201(1) / 201(1A), specifically noted the explanation of assessee in which it was submitted by assessee that assessee requested the Noida Authority to clarify their position whether their income is exempt, but, no reply have been received from them. Prior to it, the Writ Petition of Noida Authority was dismissed by Allahabad High Court. The AO therefore rejected the contention of assessee and passed the order for recovery of the short deduction with interest. The assessee in the penalty proceedings claimed that income of the Noida Authority exempt u/s 10(20), which fact was also not proved by the assessee because it was incorrect. Therefore, the assessee had been negligent in not deducting TDS on lease rent paid to Noida Authority without any justification. Since assessee failed to prove its bonafide through any relevant and cogent evidence, therefore, assessee cannot take benefit of Section 273B.

(See 2018-TIOL-402-ITAT-DEL)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.