Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2021 (7) TMI 1142

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... delay in filing the appeal before him and thereby confirming the orders of ITO (TDS) Ward - 1(1), Bangalore, dated 17.03.2015 passed under section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. The assessee, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) is a local authority overseeing the development and provision of civic amenities of the city of Bengaluru. In consideration for acquisition of land for the purpose of providing civic amenities and infrastructure, the Assessee provided Development Right's Certificate(DRC). According to the revenue the Assessee ought to have deducted tax at source on the market value of the DRC u/s.194LA of the Act and since the Assessee failed to deduct tax at source, the AO passed tw....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in filing the appeal by holding that there was an inordinate delay in filing the appeal and that there was a difference of opinion between normal delay and inordinate delay. In this regard, the CIT(A) referred to the decision of the ITAT Bench in the case of JCIT Vs. Tractors & Farm Equipments Ltd. 104 ITD 149 . The CIT(A) was also of the view that the assessee should prove it was diligent and no guilty of negligence and in this regard referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramla v. Rewa Coalfields (AIR 1962 SC 361) and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chief Post Master General and Others Vs. Living Media India Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 348 ITR 7. The CIT(A) accordingly refused to condone the de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e issue as follows: "13. We have considered the rival submissions. At the outset, we observe that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Mst. Katiji (supra), has explained the principles that need to be kept in mind while considering an application for condonation of delay. The Hon'ble Apex Court has emphasized that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations. The Court has also explained that a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging the appeal late. The Court has also explained that every day's delay must be explained does not mean that a pedantic approach should be taken. The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense and pragmatic manner. In the case of Shakuntala Hegde, L/R of R.K. Hegde ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2 in the assessee's own case was considered at length by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal and decided in favour of the assessee and against Revenue in its order in ITA Nos.719 and 720/Bang/2014 dated 14.11.2014. It was also submitted that the aforesaid order of the Tribunal (supra) was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka when it dismissed Revenue's appeal by order in ITA Nos.94 and 466 of 2015 dated 29.09.2015. The learned AR prayed that in view of the aforesaid binding decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the assessee's own case (supra), the impugned orders of the CIT(A) be set aside and the assessee's appeals be allowed. The learned DR supported the orders of the authorities below; but prayed that the matter be se....