Whether Assessee to deduct TDS on payment made directly to operation/maintenance services providers u/s 194-I?

Last updated: 11 January 2021

Court :
ITAT New Delhi

Brief :
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 16/1/2020 passed by CIT(A)-38, Delhi for Assessment Year 2011-12.

Citation :
I.T.A. No. 889/DEL/2020 (A.Y 2011-12)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI O. P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

I.T.A. No. 889/DEL/2020 (A.Y 2011-12)
(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)

Kapoor Watch Company Pvt. Ltd.
G-7, South Extension, Part-1,
New Delhi
AAACK3885A
(APPELLANT)

ACIT
Circle-75(1)
New Delhi
(RESPONDENT)

ORDER

PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 16/1/2020 passed by CIT(A)-38, Delhi for Assessment Year 2011-12.

2. The grounds of appeal are as under:-

“1. That order dated 30.3.2018 u/s 201(1 )/201(1 A) of the Act for the financial year 2010-11 was barred by limitation and therefore deserved to be quashed as such.

1.1 That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed toappreciate that since order u/s 201(1)/ 201(1 A) of the Act was beyond theperiod of six years from the end of financial year in which the payment wasmade or credit was given by the appellant company in view of the provisionscontained in section 201(3) of the Act, therefore order made was barred bylimitation.

2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) otherwise tooerred both in law and facts in upholding the order concluding that the appellantcompany be „assessee-in-default for a sum of Rs. 1,68,499/- u/s 201(1) of the Act and Rs. 1,43,963/- u/s 201 (1 A) of the Act.

To know more in details find the attachment file