9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 152X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income Tax, withdrawing/cancelling the Certificate dated 18 May 2017 issued under Section 197 of Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act" for short). The above Certificate dated 18 May 2017 had directed the parties mentioned therein obliged to deduct tax under various Sections of Chapter XVII-B of the Act, to deduct tax at lower rate of 0.39 percent instead of the normal rates. 3. It is an undisputed position before us that the facts arising in this case are identical to the facts arising in Tata Sky Limited Vs. Union of India (Writ Petition No. 2817 of 2017) and M/s. Tata Teleservices (Maharashtra) Limited Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. (Writ Petition 2701 of 2017) so far as the decision making process leading to the passing of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anting the certificate under Section 197 of the Act. This, without furnishing a copy of the reasons recorded at the time of issuing the certificate under Section 197 of the Act. This non furnishing of copy of the reasons recorded was held by us to be a flaw in the decision making process. Thus, making the impugned order unsustainable. 6. In our order dated 25 January 2018 in Tata Teleservices (Maharashtra) Limited (supra), the reasons therein on the above aspect in paragraphs 19 to 22 thereof, on identical facts, are as under: " 19 The Petitioner's primary grievance is that the impugned order dated 23 October 2017, canceling the certificate dated 4 May 2017 is completely without jurisdiction. It is not open to the Assessing Officer to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icate under Section 197 of the Act. It must of necessity be so, as in the absence of the reasons being recorded, the Certificate under Section 197 of the Act, would not be open to challenge by the Revenue, as it would be impossible to state that it is erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue. The Revenue would be helpless. Therefore, the recording of reasons is necessary as only then it could be subject to Revision by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Act. 21 Therefore, it appeared to us while correcting the order which was dictated in Court on 16 January 2017 that the order prior to issuing the certificate dated 4 May 2017 ought to have been communicated to the Petitioner along with the notice, seeking to review the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e request of the Revenue the petition was posted for directions on 25 January 2018 to enable the Respondent to respond on the above issue. On 25 January 2018, the Revenue did not make any submission to counter our prima facie view including our drawing an adverse inference on account of non furnishing of the order/reasons leading to the issue of the certificate dated 4 May 2017. Therefore, we conclude that there would have been reasons recorded in the file before issuing a certificate dated 4 May 2017 and this ought to have been furnished to the party before resting its case in the impugned order on the ground that the aspect of Rule 28 AA of the Rules was not considered at the time of granting the Certificate. Further if the Revenue seeks ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
