AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM
This Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2015-16, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Nagpur’s order dated 17.04.2025 having DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1075677007(1), involving proceedings under section 201 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s/respondent’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It next transpires with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that its sole substantive ground raised in the instant appeal seeks to reverse the CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion/findings that the Assessing Officer could not have held the assessee’s common areas maintenance “CAM” charges as attracting TDS deduction under section 194I @10% than that deducted @ 2% under section 194C of the Act.
Ms. Hansra’s case therefore is that the hon’ble jurisdictional high court in Apeejay Surrendera Park Hotels Ltd. Vs. UOI in WP(C) 1924/1999, dated 23rd March, 2016 has explained the Revenue’s very stand that the payment of such common area maintenance charges ought to be subjected to above higher rates of TDS deduction only being in the nature of rent under section 194I of the Act.
That being the case, we hardly see any merit in the Revenue’s instant sole substantive ground as the instant issue stands settled now in the assessee’s favour in CIT Vs. Bose Corporation India (Pvt.) Ltd. [2026] 186 taxmann.com 317 (SC). Rejected accordingly.
This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed.