9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 478X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nversion, all the assets and liabilities of the erstwhile partnership firm had become assets and liabilities of this Company. In I.T.T.A.No.222 of 2012, this company is the respondent. 2. The assessee along with three others i.e. M/s. Koya and Company Construction Limited, the Indian Hume Pipe Company Limited and M/s. Taherali Industries and Projects Private Limited entered into a joint venture agreement called "Agreement for Collaboration and Cooperation" on 12-03-2003 for the purposes of preparing and submitting prequalification/post qualification tender to the Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Works and Sewerage Board. According to the terms of the said agreement dated 12-03-2003 between these entities, each party i.e. co-venturer in the joi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 12-03-2003 mentioned above, each co-venturer has got its own share of work; that each co-venturer has to execute the work and get TDS certificate for having done work for its share of work; that even though the TDS certificate are in the name of the joint venture, the formation of the joint venture is only for a limited purpose of bidding tender; that each co-venturer in the joint venture has got its own separate responsibility of executing work and to receive contract receipts and also with tax liabilities; that the return of income filed by the assessee admitting contract receipts and TDS with regard to contract work of co-venturer is in order ; and that the assessing officer having entertained to assess the income/receipts part men ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same logic, due credit should also be given to the TDS involved in that certificate. 10. The Tribunal by order dated 28-07-2011 rejected the appeal of the Revenue in regard to the company (I.T.A.No.218/Hyd/11) by following its above order dated 03-06-2011 in I.T.A.No.1671/Hyd/2010 in the case of the firm. 11. Aggrieved thereby, the present appeals under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 have been filed contending: (a) that the credit for TDS given on the TDS certificates produced in the names of the Joint Venture is not in accordance with Rule 37-B A of the Rules framed under the I.T. Act. (b) The assessee is not eligible for TDS credit on the certificates produced in the names of the Directors when the same is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he person authorised by such authority. (2) (i) If the income on which tax has been deducted at source is assessable in the hands of a person other than the deductee, credit for tax deducted at source shall be given to the other person in cases where - (a) the income of the deductee is included in the total income of another person under the provisions of section 60, section 61, section 64, section 93 or section 94; (b) the income of a deductee being an association of persons or a trust is assessable in the hands of members of the association of persons, or in the hands of trustees, as the case may be; (c) the income from an asset held in the name of a deductee, being a partner of a firm or a karta of a Hindu undivided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me is assessable to tax. (4) Credit for tax deducted at source and paid to the account of the Central Government shall be granted on the basis of - (i) the information relating to deduction of tax furnished by the deductor to the income-tax authority or the person authorized by such authority: and (ii) the information in the return of income in respect of the claim for the credit, subject to verification in accordance with the risk management strategy formulated by the Board from time to time." 15. By the Income Tax (8th amendment) Rules, 2011, the CBDT amended Rule 37 BA and in sub rule (2), for clause (i), the following clause was substituted: "(i) Where under any provisions of the Act, the whole or any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DS certificates have not been doubted, credit has to be granted to the TDS mentioned therein for the assessee. 18. Rule 37BA is a procedural provision dealing with the manner of giving credit for tax deducted at source for the purposes of section 199. It therefore applies to pending proceedings. As observed in State of Madras v. Lateef Hamid & Co. AIR 1972 SC 1781, where a new procedure is prescribed by law, it governs all pending cases. 19. In Tikaram & Sons v. Commissioner of Sales Tax AIR 1968 SC 1286 it was held that alterations in the form of procedure are always retrospective, unless there is some good reason or other why they should not be. The amendment to Rule 37 BA mentioned above which has been introduced by the Income Tax (8th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
