Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2008 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (2) TMI 462 - AT - Income TaxTDS deduction u/s 192 - bona fide estimate of the perquisite - valuation of free or concessional educational facilities provided to children of the teacher and staff member - assessee-in-default u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) - value of the benefit of free education exceeded Rs. 1,000 per month, the whole of the amount was to be treated as perquisite - HELD THAT:- Section 192 casts an obligation on the employer to estimate the income under the head "Salaries" and deduct tax at the average rate at the time of its payment. Section 200 casts further obligation that any person deducting any sum shall pay within the prescribed time the sum so deducted to the credit of the Central Government. We find that the assessee had deducted a sum of Rs. 1,000 per child per month on the basis of the interpretation of the provisions given in the ready reckoner. To our mind, that interpretation may or may not have been correct, but the assessee had some basis on which the decision was taken not to deduct tax on the impugned amount of Rs. 1,000 per month per child. Therefore, unless it is shown that there was something more than mere reliance on the ready reckoner, the assessee cannot be held to be an assessee-in-default. Assessee has been providing free educational facilities to the children of the teachers and staff members. Notwithstanding these orders of the Tribunal in the case of Bal Bharti Public School [2007 (7) TMI 347 - ITAT DELHI-G], it cannot wished away that there could have been doubts in the mind of the assessee as to whether in its case deduction of Rs. 1,000 per month per child should be allowed in valuing the perquisite of free educational facility. Therefore, its reliance on the ready reckoner was not completely misplaced and in any case such a reliance could not said to be not bona fide. Respectfully following the decision in the case of Nestle India Ltd. [2000 (1) TMI 35 - DELHI HIGH COURT] it is held that this case was not fit for passing an order under section 201(1) and consequently, under section 201(1A). Thus, the appeals of the revenue are required to be dismissed on the finding that the valuation of the perquisite by the assessee could not be said to be not bona fide for the purpose of deeming it to be an assessee-in-default under section 201(1) and consequently levying interest under section 201(1A). In the result, the appeals are dismissed.
|