2026 (2) TMI 691

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....after referred to as "the Ld. CIT(A)"] for the assessment year 2016-17, relating to liability determined under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act").The grounds raised by the Revenue are reproduced as under: 1. Whether the Learned Addl./JCIT(A) has erred in facts and figures by incorrectly stating the amount of additions made by the Assessing Officer in the order passed under Section 201 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as reflected in the "Statement of Facts" on Page No. 2 of his appellate order, which are inconsistent with the figures mentioned in the original order? 2. Whether the Learned Addl./JCIT(A) has erred in facts by incorrectly referring to the name of the assessee company as "Novartis ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt terms, and even the mode of transport tare determined and controlled by Novartis India Ltd. 7. Whether the Learned Addl./JCIT(A) has failed to appreciate the that the assessee imposes various restrictions on stockists/distributors/wholesalers, such as restrictions on the sale of products, allocation of territories, appointment of stockists, and monitoring and controlling of product stocks. These restrictions clearly establish that the stockists were functioning as agents of the assessee company for promoting and effecting sales on its behalf, and hence, the assessee's contention of a principal- to-principal relationship is not valid. 8. Whether the Learned Addl./JCIT(A)has erred in holding that tax on Employee Stock....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. failed to appreciate that since the amount so accrued by the Appellant in respect of delayed payments to MSME is not arising from any debt-claim or moneys borrowed by the Company, the same is not governed by the provisions of section 194A read with section 2(28A) of the Act; 3. erred in confirming levy of interest amounting to Rs. 20,479 under section 201(1A) of the Act on the alleged amount of default; 3. Brief facts of the case are that a survey under section 133(2A) of the Act was conducted at the premises of the assessee on 22.10.2019. During the course of survey proceedings, certain defaults relating to non-deduction or short deduction of tax at source on various payments were noticed. Consequent thereto, the Ass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....along with the corresponding figures of additions, had been relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A). 4.2 It was further submitted that immediately upon receipt of the impugned order, the assessee had moved an application seeking corrigendum under section 250 of the Act. However, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the said request, observing that the order was passed on the basis of documents filed along with Form No. 35 and that no mistake had occurred. Thereafter, the assessee again filed an application for rectification on 05.08.2025, explaining that the facts of the group concern were uploaded inadvertently. The said rectification application, as submitted, is stated to be pending before the Ld. CIT(A). 5. We have carefully considered the rival submiss....