TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 940X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax Act and compute the amount accordingly - the non-resident is liable to pay tax and the question of payment of advance tax would not arise - This would be clear from the reading of Section 191 of the Act along with Section 209 (1) (d) of the Act - For this reason, it would not be permissible for the Revenue to charge any interest under Section 234B of the Act - the Tribunal has rightly held that the assessee was not liable to pay any interest under Section 234B of the Act – Decided against Revenue. - ITA Nos. 6020 to 6033 /DEL-2010 - - - Dated:- 16-7-2013 - C.M. GARG AND J. SUDHAKAR REDDY , JJ. For the Appellant : Smt. Poonam Sidhu. For the Respondent : Sachit Jolly, Rashi Dhir and Rahul Sateja. ORDER:- PER BENCH : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/S Jacabs Civil Inc. 330 ITR 578 (Delhi) and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. 4.1 All the Revenue appeals that are before us are challenging the deletion of interest levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 234B of the Act, by the Ld.Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals). 4.2 The grounds are extracted for ready reference. "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court order in the case of M/s Jacab Civil Inc. (2010) ITA No. 491/2008 and directed the AO to delete interest u/s 234B of the I.T. Act. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not takin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the tax payer is to be calculated, by reducing the tax on current income, by the amount of tax which would be "deductible or collectable" at source under the Act, during the said F.Y. Consequently, it is argued that interest u/s 234B of the Act was not leviable on the facts of the present case. Reliance is placed on the following decisions. (a) Jacabs Civil Incorporated Mitsubishi Corpn. case (supra) (b) CIT v. Madras Fertilizers Ltd.: 149 ITR 703 (Mad.) (c) DIT(Intl. Taxation) v. NGC Network Asia LLC [2009] 313 ITR 187 (Bom.) (d) SedcoForex International Drilling Inc. v. DCIT: 264 ITR 320 (Utt) (e) Motorola Inc v. DIT: 95 ITD 269 (Delhi SB) (f) Qualcomm Incorporated v. ADIT: 153 TTJ 513 (Del) 9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udgment (supra) in the manner already pointed above. The scheme of the Act in respect of non-residents is clear. Section 195 of the Act puts an obligation on the payer, i.e. any person responsible for paying to a non-resident, to deduct income-tax at source at the rates in force from such payments excluding those incomes which are chargeable under the head 'Salaries'. Therefore, the entire tax is to be deducted at source which is payable on such payments made by the payee to the non-resident. Section 201 of the Act lays down the consequences of failure to deduct or pay. These consequences include not only the liability to pay the amount which such a person was required to deduct at source from the payments made to a non-resident but also pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
