AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:
This appeal preferred by the revenue against the order dated 13.11.2023 of Ld. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPEAL ADDL/JCIT (A)-2 COIMBATORE (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or ‘the ld. FAA’ for short) in DIN & Order No : ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1057907901(1) arising out of the order dated 06.03.2023 u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by ITO, Ward-74(4), Delhi for AY: 2016 -17.
Heard and perused the record. The issue involved is the challenge of the demand raised u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act on account of non-deduction of TDS by the assessee company of External Development Charges (EDC) payments to HUDA which is deleted by the Ld. CIT(A).
On going through the impugned order dated 13.11.2023 we find that ld. CIT(A) has taken into consideration the Coordinate Bench decision of this Tribunal. However, the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in M/s Puri Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT & Others 159 taxmann.com 444 (Del) has thereafter laid down that such EDC payments to HUDA are liable for TDS u/s 194C of the Act. Ld. AR has been unable to counter any law to the contrary.
In the light of aforesaid ground raised by the revenue are sustained and the impugned order of ld. CIT(A) is quashed. The appeal stand allowed.