Case Number: ITA 1476/DEL/2020
Appellant: Cantabil Retail India Ltd, New Delhi
Respondent: ACIT Circle-73(1), New Delhi
Assessment Year: 2011-12
Result: 2011-12
Case Filed On: 2020-08-07
Order Type: Final Tribunal Order
Date of Order: 2023-05-31
Pronounced On: 2023-05-31
Cantabil Retail India Ltd, based in New Delhi, filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A)-38, Delhi dated 31.01.2020. The appeal was regarding the determination of TDS liability by the ACIT Circle-73(1), New Delhi for the assessment year 2011-12. The primary issue was the TDS on Common Area Maintenance (CAM) charges, which the appellant had deducted at 2% under section 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, while the Assessing Officer (AO) contended that TDS should have been deducted at 10% under section 194I, treating CAM charges as part of rent.
The case was heard by the Delhi Bench ‘B’ of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), New Delhi, comprising Shri N. K. Billaiya, Accountant Member, and Shri Anubhav Sharma, Judicial Member.
ITA No. 1476/Del/2020: This appeal by Cantabil Retail India Ltd was against the order of the CIT(A)-38, Delhi dated 31.01.2020, pertaining to A.Y. 2011-12 regarding the determination of TDS liability on CAM charges.
The appellant’s counsel argued that the order dated 30.03.2018 was barred by limitation as the impugned financial year was 2010-11 and the period of limitation expired after two years from the end of the financial year, meaning the order should have been framed on or before 31.03.2014. However, the order was framed on 30.03.2018.
The Tribunal noted that the order was framed on 30.03.2018 and the impugned financial year was 2010-11. The Tribunal referenced the decision of the coordinate Bench in the case of Connaught Plaza Restaurants P. Ltd. (ITA No.993 and 1984/Del/2020, order dated 31.12.2021) which held that amendments brought in by the Finance Act, 2014, effective from 01.10.2014, are prospective and do not apply retrospectively to revive the limitation period that had already expired.
The Tribunal highlighted that the time limit for passing an order under sub-section (1) to Section 201 for the financial year 2010-11 expired on 31.03.2014. Therefore, the order passed on 30.03.2018 was clearly barred by limitation.
In light of the above findings, the Tribunal quashed the order dated 30.03.2018 as it was barred by limitation. Since the order was quashed, the Tribunal did not find it necessary to dwell into the merits of the case. The appeal of the appellant, Cantabil Retail India Ltd, was allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 31.05.2023.
SD/-
(ANUBHAV SHARMA)
Judicial Member
SD/-
(N. K. BILLAIYA)
Accountant Member
Date: 31.05.2023
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(A)
5. DR
Assistant Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform