GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (10) TMI 1617 - ITAT PANAJI

2015 (10) TMI 1617 - ITAT PANAJI - TMI - TDS liability u/s 194C - payment made to contractors - CIT(A)deleted tds liability - Held that:- Clause 3(e) and 3(f) clearly shows that the amount of ₹ 10 crores retained by the contractor, M/s. Arihant Ship Breakers Pvt. Ltd. from the sale of the scrap is clearly payment received by M/s. Arihant Ship Breakers Pvt. Ltd. in lieu of the contract and against the bid of ₹ 99 crores being the final amount due to the contractor. Just because the co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

circumstances, we are of the view that the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue is not sustainable on the facts of the case and consequently stands reversed. - Decided in favour of Revenue. - ITA Nos. 330 & 331/PNJ/2014 - Dated:- 16-6-2015 - George Mathan, JM And N. K. Billaiya, AM,JJ. For the Appellant : Raghu K Pikale, CA For the Respondent : Mehboob Ali Khan, Ld DR ORDER Per George Mathan 1. ITA No. 330/PNJ/2014 is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A), Panaji in ITA No. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ff by this common order. 2. It was the submission by the ld. DR that the Assessee, Department of Tourism had entered into a contract with one M/s. Arihant Ship Breakers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai for the removal of a stranded vessel, M.V River Princess which was stranded in the shallow waters off Sinquerim beach. The contract was for an amount of ₹ 99 crores. The Government approved valuers had valued the scrap from the vessel at ₹ 14.01 crores which was to be adjusted towards the final payme .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Assessee, being Department of Tourism, Govt. of Goa, had not deducted TDS. Consequently, levy u/s 201(1) was raised alongwith interest u/s 201(1A) for the F.Y 2010-11 and 2011-12. It was the submission by the ld. DR that as the TDS had not been made, the levy was rightly made u/s 201 & 201(1A) for both the financial years. It was the submission that before the ld. CIT(A) the Assessee had contended that the contract was on "No Cure No Pay" condition and as the complete scrap had .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Arihant Ship Breakers Pvt. Ltd. was part of the contract and there was no condition of deposit in the contract between the Assessee and M/s. Arihant Ship Breakers Pvt. Ltd. and consequently, the same should not have been treated as a deposit but as part payment of the total consideration of ₹ 99 crores for which the contract was entered into between the Assessee and M/s. Arihant Ship Breakers Pvt. Ltd. 3. In reply, the ld. AR submitted that the said amount of ₹ 10 crores was only a d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in it was specifically accepted that the contract was on "No Cure No Pay" basis. It was the submission that even as on today as there is still certain portion of the wreck at the site buried 3 to 6 mtrs. below the sea bed and consequently, the payment has not been disbursed to the contractor, viz. M/s. Arihant Ship Breakers Pvt. Ltd., Bombay. It was the submission that even the ld. CIT(A) has categorically confirmed in pg. 18 of his order that the Assessee, Department of Tourism has ne .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version