TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 172X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payments made by the assessee to its constituent members, there was no question to treat the assessees in default u/s 201(1). Following above judicial pronouncements, we are of the view that the relief granted to the assessee by the order of the CIT (A) is just and proper and therefore shall be sustained - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.762/Hyd/2015 - - - Dated:- 1-7-2016 - Shri B. Ramakotaiah, Accountant Member and Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuri, Judicial Member For Tnhe Revenue: Shri R.B. Naik, DR For The Assessee : Shri K.C. Devdas ORDER Per Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuri, J.M. This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the learned CIT (A)-IV Hyderabad dated 13.02.2015 for the releva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entire contract received of ₹ 13,24,39,340 to its constituent member M/s. Pallavi Constructions. Assessee was asked to submit the TDS particulars on the said contract payments. The assessee contended that the TDS provisions u/s 194C are not applicable to the case of the assessee for the year under consideration as the duty of the joint venture was only bidding for the contract by filing the declaration and after bidding, the members of the AOP executed the contract and received the contract receipts and therefore, that there is no contract or sub-contract relationship existed in between the joint venture and its members. The learned AR of the assessee relied on the following Court decisions: (a) Punjab Haryana High Court order i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rein it was held that no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) could be made in view of the fact that the tax has been paid by the constituent. It is the case of the assessee since the entire amount transferred to the constituent has already been paid to them, no amount remained payable as on 31.03.2011 and therefore, section 40(a)(ia) would not have any application based on the decision of the ITAT Visakhapatnam Special Bench decision in the case of M/s. Merilyn Shipping Transport vs. ACIT (146 TTJ 1). The learned CIT (A) held that as per various judicial pronouncements relied upon by the assessee, there is no obligation on assessee to deduct the TDS on the payments made to its constituent. Accordingly no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) can be made. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hyderabad in ITA Nos.323 to 336 and CO 29 to 42 of 2014 in the case of KCEL-MEIL (JV) Hyderabad dated 13.01.2014 wherein it was held by the Tribunal at Para 30 as under: 30. Keeping in view the above discussion, we find ourselves in agreement with the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that the common issue involved in the present cases is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by at least three decisions of the coordinate benches of this Tribunal where in a similar issue has been decided in favour of the assessee, involving similar facts and circumstances of the case. We therefore, find no infirmity in the impugned order of the learned CIT(A), whereby she held following two of the three decisions of the Tribunal, v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
