2016 (6) TMI 528 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal Upholds Decision: Lease Premium Not Subject to TDS

The Income-tax Officer (TDS) -3, Pune Versus V.P. Town Planners

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision that the lease premium paid to PCNTDA was not subject to TDS under section ... TDS u/s 194I - non deduction of tds on lease premium paid to Pimpri Chinchwad New Township Development Authority (PCNTDA) - demand raised under section 201(1) and 201(1A) - Held that:- The issue arising in the present appeal before us is identical to the issue before the Tribunal in ITO vs. Camp Education Society (2014 (10) TMI 902 - ITAT PUNE) and following the same parity of reasoning, we hold that the assessee is not liable to deduct tax at source out of the lease premium payments paid to PCNTDA. Accordingly, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) in holding that the lease premium paid by the assessee was outside the purview of section 194I of the Act and the Assessing Officer was not justified in raising the demand under section 201(1) of the Act and charging interest under section 201(1A) of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:- Whether the demand raised under section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of lease premium payment is justified.- Whether the lease premium paid to Pimpri Chinchwad New Township Development Authority (PCNTDA) is subject to tax deduction at source under section 194I of the Act.Analysis:- The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A)-10, Pune, concerning the assessment year 2011-12, related to the demand raised under section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Revenue contended that the lease premium payment made to PCNTDA should be considered as rent for TDS purposes under section 194I of the Act.- The CIT(A) considered the arguments and various Tribunal orders, concluding that the lease premium was a pre-condition for entering into the lease agreement with PCNTDA, and thus, not subject to TDS under section 194I. Stamp duty had been paid on the market value of the plot represented by the lease premium, supporting the deletion of the demand raised by the Assessing Officer.- The Tribunal referred to a similar case involving Camp Education Society, where it was held that the lease premium paid to PCNTDA was not liable for TDS under section 194I, as it was a pre-condition for obtaining the lease rights. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.- Citing precedents like Navi Mumbai SEZ (P) Ltd. and M/s. Wadhwa Associates, the Tribunal emphasized that payments like lease premiums were not subject to TDS under section 194I. The Tribunal found that the lease premium paid by the assessee was outside the purview of section 194I, and the demand raised under section 201(1) and 201(1A) was unjustified.- Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the order of the CIT(A) that the lease premium paid to PCNTDA was not subject to TDS under section 194I, and the demand raised under section 201(1) and 201(1A) was not justified.This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the legal intricacies involved in determining the tax treatment of lease premium payments and the applicability of TDS provisions under the Income Tax Act, 1961.