2025 (8) TMI 1780

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3. The challenge in this appeal under 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is to an order dated 05.12.2024 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Delhi Bench, New Delhi in two appeals being ITA No. 2003/De1/2024, Delhi 2024 and ITA No. 2004/De1/2024. Both relate to Assessment Years(A.Y) 2013-14 and 2016-17, whereby, the Tribunal has decided both the appeals in favour of the respondent by stating in paragraph 6 onwards as under : "6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in ignoring the decision of this Hon'ble Jurisdictional Tribunal in M/s. Johnson Watch Company Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT Circle 75(1), New Delhi, ITA No. 1738/Del/2020 and Paramount Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. CIT(A), Circle-19(1), ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rdinate Bench of this Tribunal wherein it was observed that the primary liability to pay the tax is on the recipient of income and therefore, such tax cannot be recovered from the Appellant. 11. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has vehemently ignored the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs Eily Lilly & Co Pvt. Ltd. (2007) 312 ITR 225 (SC) and reiterated by Hon'ble Mumbai ITAP in ICICI Securities Limited, ITA No. 1511/ Mum /2022 that "the liability of deducting tax at source is in the nature of a vicarious liability, which pre-supposes existence of primary liability. The said liability is a vicarious liability and the principal liability is of the person who ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... learned counsel for the appellant fairly concede that the issue is covered by the decision of this Court in the case captioned Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-1, Delhi v. Liberty Retail Revolutions Ltd. in ITA 170/2025 decided on 22.05.2025, wherein, this Court on identical issue has in paragraphs 9 and 10 stated as under:- "9. At the outset, it would be relevant to refer to the decision of the learned ITAT in ITA 504/Del/2020. The relevant extract of the same as reproduced by the learned ITAT in the impugned order, is set out below: "9. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. We find force in the contention of the Counsel. This Tribunal in ITA No.504/Del/2020 order dated 15.02.20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erized and/or brought within the meaning of "rent" as defined in Section 194-1 of the Act. 13. In the backdrop of our aforesaid deliberations, we concur with the claim of the ld. AR that as the payments towards CAM charges are in the nature of contractual payments that are made for availing certain services/facilities, and not for use of any premises/ equipment, therefore, the same would be subjected to deduction of tax at source u/s. 194C of the Act. Our aforesaid view is supported by the order of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Kapoor Watch Company P. Ltd. vs. ACIT in ITA No.889/Del/2020. In the aforesaid case, the genesis of the controversy as in the case of the assessee before us were pertain proceedings conducted by the Department in th....