TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nestle Ltd. (2000 (1) TMI 35 - DELHI High Court) wherein it has been held that the deduction of income tax subject to regular assessment in the hands of the payee / recipients. We see no reason to interfere in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) nor any flaw or infirmity has been pointed out by the Ld. DR so as to take different view in the matter. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is accordingly upheld. - Decided against revenue. - I.T.A. Nos. 4017, 4018 & 4019/DEL/2012 - - - Dated:- 26-9-2014 - SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JJ. For Department by : Smt. Parminder Kaur, Sr. DR For Assessee by : Shri Dr. Ram Samujh, Advocate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ateral agreement. The Liaison Office is situated at Zamrudpur, New Delhi. A search and seizure operation under section 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was conducted on 11.9.2007 against the assessee. The assessee prior to date of search did not deduct the tax at source from the salary and perquisites of 25 Expatriate employees. However, after the date of search the assessee has deducted the tax for the period under consideration and deposited the same to the Govt. exchequers. Assessing Officer (TDS) held that the assessee was liable for short deduction of TDS and accordingly, he charged the shortfall for tax amount as per the provisions of section 201(1) and charged the interest u/s. 201(1A) against such short fall of taxes. Therefore, he levied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Paper Book having pages 1 to 74 containing the assessment records, written submissions etc. 7. Ld. Counsel of the assessee has relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and requested that the same may be upheld. 7.1 On the other hand, Ld. DR has relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer and reiterated on the contention raised in the grounds of appeal that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the demand raised u/s. 201(1) and erred in reducing the interest liability raised u/s. 201(1) relying upon the decision of the Hon ble High Court in the case of M/s Nestle India Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 435 wherein it has been held that the deduction of income tax subject to regu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ITAT which held that those cases were not fit for passing the order u/s. 201(1) and consequently charging the interest u/s. 201(1A). 8. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records and precedents relied upon. In view of the aforesaid discussions and precedents, we find considerable force in the contention of the Ld. Counsel of the assessee. We also find that the Ld. CIT(A) while allowing the claim of the assessee has relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nestle Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 345. We see no reason to interfere in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) nor any flaw or infirmity has been pointed out by the Ld. DR so as to take different view in the matter. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
