News Update

US Nurse convicted of killing 17 patients - 700 yrs of jail-term awardedGST - Payment of pre-deposit through Form GST DRC-03 instead of the prescribed Form APL-01 - Petitioner attributes it to technical glitches - Respondent is the proper authority to decide the question of fact: HC2nd Session of India-Nigeria Joint Trade Committee held in AbujaGST - Since SCN is bereft of any details and suffers from infirmities that go to the root of the cause, SCN is quashed and set aside: HC1717 candidates to contest elections in phase 4 of Lok Sabha ElectionsGST - Once Appellate Authority comes to the conclusion that SCN was issued by an officer who was not competent; reply was also considered by an incompetent authority and the Competent Authority had not applied its independent mind, Appellate Authority could not have assumed original jurisdiction and proceeded further with the matter: HC7th India-Indonesia Joint Defence Cooperation Committee meeting held in New DelhiGST - Neither the Show Cause Notice nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, therefore, the same cannot be sustained: HCMining sector registers record production in FY 2023-24GST - If the proper officer was of the view that the reply is unclear and unsatisfactory, he could have sought further details by providing such opportunity - Having failed to do so, order cannot be sustained - Matter remanded: HCAnother quake of 6.0 magnitude rocks Philippines; No damage reported so farI-T - Initial burden of proof rested on assessee to substantiate his claim of having incurred expenditure on improvement of property: ITATTrade ban: Israel hits back against Turkey with counter-measuresI-T - Agricultural income can be treated by ITO as undisclosed income in absence of any substantial / corroborative material to prove same: ITATCanada arrests three persons in alleged killing of Sikh separatistI-T - Income from sale of property has to be classified & characterised only in manner of computation as per section 45(2): ITATCus - When there is nothing on record to show that appellant had connived with other three persons to import AA batteries under the guise of declaring goods as Calcium Carbonate, penalty imposed on appellant are set aside: HCCongress fields Rahul Gandhi from Rae Bareli and Kishori Lal Sharma from AmethiGST -Since both the SCNs and orders pertain to same tax period raising identical demand by two different officers of same jurisdiction, proceedings on SCNs are clubbed and shall be re-adjudicated by one proper officer: HCFormer Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implicationI-T - Interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 awarded by Court is capital receipt being integral part of enhanced compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37): ITATGirl students advised by Pak college to keep away from political events
 
Whether payment of interest by banks to Industrial Development Authorities requires deduction of tax at source in terms of section 194A(3)(iii)(f) - NO: ITAT

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, OCT 14, 2015: THE issue is - Whether the payment of interest by banks to the State Industrial Development Authorities requires any deduction of tax at source in terms of section 194A(3)(iii)(f). NO is the answer.

Facts of the case

The assessee, a Branch of Canara Bank, made interest payment of Rs.20,10,00,000/- to 'NOIDA' without deduction of tax at source. NOIDA claimed before the assessee bank that it was a local authority and, hence, its income was exempt from tax and, as such, no deduction of tax at source was required. The matter was carried before the Allahabad High Court by way of writ petition as various banks including the assessee and NOIDA authorities were not in agreement with the claim of its eligibility for exemption as local authority u/s 10(20). The Allahabad High Court, decided the issue against NOIDA, thereby denying the benefit of exemption u/s 10(20). Pursuant to this order by the Allahabad HC, the Addl. CIT (TDS), took up proceedings u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) and issued a show cause notice to the assessee as to why it may not be declared as 'assessee in default' for non-deduction of tax at source on the amount of interest paid by it to NOIDA. The assessee claimed that no deduction of tax at source on interest payment made to NOIDA was warranted in view of the applicability of the provisions of section 194A(3)(iii)(f). The Addl. CIT(TDS) passed order u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) r/w section 194A treating the assessee in default for a total sum of Rs.5,06,29,869/-. The CIT(A) allowed the Appeal.

On Appeal before the Tribunal the DR submitted that the CIT(A), Noida, did not have any territorial jurisdiction over the order passed by the Addl. CIT (TDS), Ghaziabad. It was submitted that the correct jurisdiction lied with CIT(A), Ghaziabad. Since the order was wrongly passed by CIT(A), Noida, the DR pleaded that the same be declared as null and void. The AR submitted that the CIT(A), Noida, had rightful jurisdiction over the matter. On merit the DR submitted that since NOIDA has been constituted as a corporation established 'under' the State Act and not 'by' the State Act, the exemption to the assessee bank from tax withholding stood waived.

Having heard the parties, the Tribunal held that,

++ between 5.6.2014 and 15.11.2014, the jurisdiction of the first appellate authority to pass the orders against the orders passed by the Addl.CIT, Ghaziabad rested with the CIT(A), Ghaziabad and for the periods prior to 5.6.2014 and after 15.11.2014, it vested in CIT(A), Noida. Since the impugned order was passed on 2.12.2013, it becomes palpable that it was only the CIT(A), Noida who had rightful jurisdiction over the appeal emanating from the order passed by the Addl. CIT(TDS), Ghaziabad;

++ the NOIDA is a statutory corporation established by means of the UP Industrial Area Development Act, 1976. This Act is nothing but a culmination of several area-wise Industrial Area Development Acts. Since NOIDA has been notified under the UP Industrial Area Development Act, we are of the considered opinion that the expression 'any corporation established by a State Act' shall include NOIDA;

++ the payment of interest by banks to the State Industrial Development Authorities does not require any deduction of tax at source in terms of section 194A(3)(iii)(f) and, hence, the failure to deduct tax at source on such interest cannot lead to the banks being treated as assessee in default. The CIT(A) was justified in reversing the order passed by the Addl. CIT (TDS), Ghaziabad declaring the assessee liable u/s 201(1) and 201(1A).

(See 2015-TIOL-1641-ITAT-DEL)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.