2022 (11) TMI 315

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ction 201 (1) and charging interest at Rs 5,87,277 under section 201(1 A) without giving adequate opportunity to the assessee to present its case is unjust, illegal, arbitrary, illusory and the order deserves to be quashed. 2. The action of learned CIT(A) in holding 10 percent TDS should have been deducted under section 194I instead of 2 percent deducted by the assessee under section 194C on payment of Rs 4,43,046 to Ambience Developers and Infrastructure and thus creating a demand of Rs 35,887 under section 201(1) and Rs 32,298 under section 201(1A) is unjust, illegal, arbitrary, illusory and the demand deserves to be quashed. 3. The action of the learned CIT(A) in holding 10 percent TDS should have been deducted under se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... When the case was called for hearing, neither the assessee nor any authorized representative appeared nor any adjournment application has been filed. The notice issued for today's hearing has been returned by the Postal Authorities with the remark, 'No such person is found at the given address.' However, on perusal of the record, we find that this appeal can be disposed of even in the absence of the assessee, after hearing the arguments of the ld. Sr. DR appearing on behalf of the Department. We, therefore, proceed to adjudicate the appeal accordingly. 4. From the grounds as reproduced hereinabove, we note that the sole issue for our adjudication is as to whether the AO as well as the ld.CIT(A) were correct and justified in holding that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....peration/maintenance was made directly to the services providers after deduction of TDS u/s 194C of the Act. There is a Triparty Agreement which was on record before the Assessing Officer as well as before the CIT(A). These facts were never disputed by the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A). The only dispute that arises by revenue that assessee company should deduct TDS on payment made directly to operation/maintenance services providers u/s 194-I of the Act instead of Section 194C of the Act by relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in case of Sunil Kumar Gupta vs. ACIT 389 ITR 38 wherein the Hon'ble Court held that maintenance charges must form a part of the rent while calculating the annual value of pr....