TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 1548
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s.194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act‟) in respect of payments made by assessee joint venture to its members. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an AOP engaged in the activity of civil contractors. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by the assessee on 31.08.2013 declaring total income at Rs. Nil. The Assessing Officer on verification observed that the assessee AOP was formed to submit a joint bid for construction and was in receipt of Rs. 7,24,07,696/- as contract charges. The contract charges received were further distributed to its members M/s. Shraddha Energy and Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ld. for executing the work. On....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....its own case and other Joint Venture cases involving similar issue vide ITA Nos.942/943/944/PN/2013 on 28.11.2014. In this order the Hon'ble Bench analyzed the issue in the context of its own decision in ITO Vs. Swapnali RDS Joint Venture in ITA No.771/PN/2011. In that case, the facts of which are identical, the hon'ble Bench has held that there was no relationship of contractor and contractee between the joint venture and its partners and since contract receipts, assets, liabilities were apportioned between the members, therefore, taxability of the income has be considered in the hands of the members and not the joint venture. Since the Hon'ble Bench has already decided the matter in the appellant's own case for A.Y.2009-10, which has also....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment and the Hon'ble Pune Bench decision in appellant's own case vide order dated 28.11.2014 as discussed above, grounds of appeal No.1 to 5 are allowed." 5. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has granted relief to the assessee on the ground that matter in assessee‟s own case for A.Ys.2011-12 and 2012-13 were similar to assessment year 2009-10 and on the same issue, relief was provided to the assessee. This issue was placed at a favourable footing in respect of the assessee herein. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) even based his decision on the ruling of the Hon‟ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bhooratnam & Company reported in 262 CTR 405 (AP). 6. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yee has admittedly filed its return of income disclosing the impugned receipts and income earned by it embedded in the receipt has been duly offered for taxation. In this view of the matter, the assessee Joint Venture cannot be treated as assessee in default in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ansal Land Mark Township (P.) Ltd. (supra) and the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Shri Chandrakant J. Mandale (supra). Thus, seen from any angle, we find no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed." 7. Both the sides are unanimous in stating that the issues involved in the present appeal are identical. Therefore, in t....