TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1318
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C) and (6) & (7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') dated 13.01.2023 for the assessment year 2021-22 & 2020-21. As the facts and issues involved in the captioned appeals are common, therefore, the same are being taken up and disposed off by way of a consolidated order. 2. We shall first take up the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No.471/RPR/2024 for assessment year 2021-22, wherein the assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us: "1) That under the facts and the law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi erred in not considering the material available with him on Written Submission & Paper Book, Statement of facts & Grounds of appeal. Prayed that the Appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch dated 21/07/2023 wherein the lead case was DMO, Bemetara and there were other five Mining Offices in Chhattisgarh & that direction for aforesaid examination by Hon'ble ITAT was for appeals in case of DMO Bemetara and in other cases of DMO, Hon'ble ITAT directed that its order will apply Mutatis Mutandis. That the appellant was not authorized u/s 9 of MMDR Act, 1957 to receive contribution towards DMF or NMET from lease holders nor he has received such contribution. The facts of DMO, Bemetara are different from the facts of appellant's case and as per direction of Hon'ble ITAT, the common order of Hon'ble ITAT should apply "Mutatis Mutandis" and therefore the direction of the U. CIT(A) to AO to verify whether the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the procedure and the order of the AO is as per law. The contention of the appellant, that the AO follow order of the earlier year is also without any basis. When the order was already passed in earlier years in the case of the appellant and facts of the year under consideration remain the same as for the earlier year, there is no reason for the AO to deviate from findings of the earlier year unless there is any change in law or new facts and evidences are brought on record which is not a case here. Hence, the order of the AO is as per law in grounds No. 1 to 4 of the appeal are dismissed. 6.2 Ground No. 5 of the appellant is on TCS on illegal mining, storage and transportation and ground No. 6 is on TCS on DMF. These grounds of appeal r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ource (TCS) on the contributions made by the lease holders to DMF. However, if the appellant was in receipt of contributions towards DMF from the lease holders, the appellant was liable to collect tax at source on these amounts. 6.4.1 Hence, wherever the lease holders had directly made payment to the District Mining Fund, the demand raised by the A.O. including interest thereon u/s. 206C(1 C) r.w.s. 206C(6), 206C(6A) and 206C(7) of the Act is deleted. 6.4.2 However, wherever the appellant had received contribution from the lease holders towards the District Mining Fund, the demand raised by the A.O. including interest thereon u/s. 206C(1C) r.w.s.206C(6), 206C(6A) and 206C(7) of the Act is confirmed. 6.4.3 The A.O. is directed to verif....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....023 & 37 others, dated 21.07.2023. The Ld. AR had placed on our record copy of the order passed by the Tribunal in the aforesaid case (supra). 8. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative (for short 'DR') submitted that both the issues involved in the present appeal, viz. (i) the assessee's default in not collecting tax at source (TCS) a/w. interest on illegal mining, illegal storage and illegal transportation u/s. 206C(1C) and (6) & (7) of the Act; and (ii) for its failure to deduct tax at source in respect of contribution towards District Mining Fund (DMF), had been deliberated at length by the ITAT, Raipur while disposing of the appeals in the cases of District Mining Officer, Bemetara Vs. DCIT (TDS), Raipur (C.G) & Ors, ITA No.8/....