TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not liable to deduct TDS - the order of the ld.CIT(A) upheld - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - ITA. No. 379/Ahd/2012 - - - Dated:- 1-6-2016 - Rajpal Yadav (Judicial Member) And N. K. Billaiya (Accountant Member) For the Revenue : Sonia Kumar, Sr.DR For the Assessee : None ORDER Rajpal Yadav (Judicial Member) The present appeal is directed at the instance of the Revenue against order of the ld.CIT(A)-I, Surat dated 15.11.2011 passed in the Asstt.Year 2004-05. 2. Solitary grievance of the Revenue is that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the demand of ₹ 46,66,999/- raised by the AO under section 201(1) and interest of ₹ 44,80,320/- charged under section 201(1A) of the Income tax Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll as Hon ble Gujarat High Court passed in assessee s own case in Tax Appeal No.440 of 2006. The ld.DR was unable to controvert the pleadings in the written submissions. 6. We have duly considered contentions of the ld.DR and gone through the written submissions. We find that this issue was considered in the case of the assessee by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the Asstt.Year 2003-04. The judgment of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court has been placed on page no.47 to 52 of the paper book. In that order, the Tribunal has decided the issue against the assessee. The question framed by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court reads as under: Whether in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee, therein, was required to deduct TDS. However, this Court, in that case, held that to transport the gas was a part of sale transaction, and therefore, the assessee, therein, was not required to deduct TDS. In our view, therefore, the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT (TDS) VS. KRISHAK BHARTI COOPERATIVE LTD. (Supra) applies in full force to the facts of this case. The aforesaid provision would apply to the person, who had paid any sum, and the respondent has not paid any charges. The case of the assessee in Tax Appeal No. 211 of 2006 is identical, and hence, the authorities below grossly erred in interpreting the provisions of law, and therefore, the grounds urged by the appellant find favour with us. 10. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
