TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 800
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing delay in filing the Cross Objections. 3 We have gone through the condonation petition. The reasons stated in the petition that there was no time to prepare the paper book and the requisite documents. We find that the reasons advanced in the affidavit cannot be find a reasonable cause. To condone the delay there must be a reasonable cause. The reasons advanced by the assessee are general and casual in nature. Being so, we are of the opinion that there is no good and reasonable cause to condone the delay. Accordingly, the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed as non admitted. 4 In the appeals, the revenue has raised the ground that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 201(1)( and 201(1A) of the Act. 5 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of which Rs. 8,23,250/- was paid to non residents on which TDS is deductible u/s 195 of the Act @ 30.9% and for the balance amount u/s 194 @ 10% which workout to Rs. 4,85,794/-. Accordingly, the AO considered the assessee in default u/s 201 and 201(1A) of the Act. Similar case in the next year 2013-14 also. 5.1 On appeal, the CIT(A) by placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6585 of 1999 dt 17.2.2005 in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs M/s Kone Elevators (India) Ltd., allowed the claim of the assessee in both years by observing that the contract is not a 'work contract' but only a 'contract for sale' and therefore, no TDS is applicable. Consequently interest ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Tata Teleservices Ltd reported in 122 ITR 592, wherein it has been held that the excess amount received on transfer of right in a property is in the nature of a capital receipt, and therefore, held that the provisions of section 194A is not applicable in the transactions undertaken by the assessee. Accordingly the CIT(A) directed the AO to delete the addition made on this count. Consequently, the interest charged u/s 201(1A) in both the years was also deleted. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal for both the years. 6 We have heard the parties and perused the relevant material on record. Regarding the first issue, the we find that the same is covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Andhra Prades....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rned with the nature of payment in the hands of the assessee only. In the present case, the assessee debited to the P&L account as expenses under the head " indirect expenses" (shown as excess refund). Admittedly, in this case, the person who has entered into agreement with the assessee for purchase of flats has paid money to the assessee which has been outstanding with the assessee. Meanwhile, due to change of circumstances, the original buyer of the flat was not able to purchase from the assessee which was sold to the new party. This necessitated the payment of excess amount over and above the amount paid by the original buyer of the flat and the assessee has debited the expenses in the P&L account under the head "excess payment refund"; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te. The definition of interest has been carried to the extent that even the amounts payable in transactions were money has not been borrowed and that has not been incurred, are brought within the scope of its definition, as in the case of service fees paid in respect of a credit facility which has not been utilized. Undisputedly, in the instant case, the amounts were paid in respect of an obligation in respect of purchase of flat through agreement, therefore, no fault can be found on the part of the AO for treating these charges as interest and liable for TDS u/s 194A of the Act. The mere fact that the assessee did not choose to characterize such payment as interest, will not take such payment out of the ambit of the definition of "interest....