2026 (8) TMI 474

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ome Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') arising out of assessment order dated 08.04.2025 of Ld. Assessing Officer / ITO, Ward No. 73(1), Room No. 401, 4th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the AO') u/s 201/201(1A) of the Act for Assessment Year 2022-23 to 2024-25 respectively. 2. All the cases having similar facts, grounds and issues. So, we are taking 939/Del/2026 as a lead case. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the case of assessee was taken up for verification on the basis of information received from complainant through CPGRAM Portal in the complaint was mentioned that the assessee had m....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....had no intention of causing any loss to the Revenue. The company did not gain any mandatory benefit by not deducting and depositing TDS. As per notification No. 28/2025/F No. 300195/3/2024-ITA in the Extraordinary Gazette of India, income, Greater Noida is not accepted. 7. Reliance was placed on Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage (P.) Ltd vs. CIT, (2007) 293 ITR 226(SC), wherein it was held in para No. 10 as under: "10. Be that as it may, the Circular No. 275/201/95-IT(B), dated 29-1-1997 issued by the Central board of Direct Taxes, in our considered opinion, should put an end to the controversy. The circular declares "no demand visualized under section 201(1) of the Income-tax Act should be enforced after the tax deductor has satisfi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essee should have deducted under section 194C while computing interest chargeable under section 201(1A). If the revenue is permitted to levy interest under the provisions of section 201(1A), even in the case where the person liabile to pay the tax has paid the tax on the date due for the payment of the tax, the revenue would derive under benefit or advantage by getting interest on the amount of tax which had already been paid on the due date. Such a position, in our opinion, cannot be permitted." 10. Ld. Departmental Representative relied on impugned order. 11. From examination of record in light of above said rival contention it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 14.11.2025 confirmed levy of interest of Rs. 3,36,254/- ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d be no recovery of the tax alleged to be in default once again from the assessee therein considering the fact that the recipient had already paid the tax on the amount received from the assessee. The said order of the Tribunal was challenged before the High Court which in turn interfered with the same. Further appeal came up before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the said appeal, the Apex Court found that the Tribunal came to the right conclusion that the tax once again could not be recovered from the appellant therein since the tax has already been paid by the recipient of the income. The Apex Court also relied on the circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes in Circular No. 275/201/95-IT (B) dated 29.01.1997 wherein it is declar....