Dismissed

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-2 v. M/S Tv Today Network Ltd.

Delhi HC7 May 2024ITA/56/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of the Income-Tax Department against the ITAT's deletion of a penalty under Section 271C. The court upheld the ITAT's finding that the deductor demonstrated reasonable cause, as expenses were disallowed under Section 40(a)(ia) by the assessee, and the respondent was not served notice under Section 201.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed maintaining the deletion of penalty under Section 271C.

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-2 Vs M/S Tv Today Network Ltd. — Income Tax | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~19

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ITA 56/2024

¶4

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS)-2..... Appellant Through: Mr. Vipul Agarwal, SSC with Mr. Gibran Naushad & Ms. Sakashi Shairwal, JSCs.

¶5

Versus

¶6

M/S TV TODAY NETWORK LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mahir Aggarwal & Mr. Madhur Aggarwal, Advs.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

¶9

O R D E R % 07.05.2024

¶10

We have heard Mr. Vipul Agrawal, learned counsel appearing in support of the appeal and Mr. Salil Aggarwal, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent. The appeal came to be admitted by us in terms of an order dated 23 January 2024 and whereby the following question of law has been framed:

¶11

“A. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was Justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271C wherein disallowance of provision of liability of expenditure does not absolve the tax deductor of his statutory duty to deduct TDS under the Act?”

¶12

We note from a reading of the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“ CIT(A) ”] that categorical findings came to be returned to the effect that the Assessing Officer was not justified in imposing the penalties and that in any case the assessee had shown and established reasonable cause for non-

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/05/2024 at 11:45:08

¶14

deduction of tax at source. The CIT(A) took note of the undisputed position which was that the expenses shown in the books of account of the assessee had been disallowed by the assessee itself under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and claimed in the subsequent years after deduction of tax at source. It is this view taken by the CIT(A) which has come to be affirmed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [“ ITAT ”].

¶15

Apart from the aforesaid, we note that the ITAT has additionally taken into consideration the fact that the respondent had not been placed on notice under Section 201 of the Act and thus not even treated to be an assessee in default.

¶16

On an overall conspectus of the aforesaid, we find no justifiable ground to interfere with the view ultimately taken by the ITAT. The appeal fails and shall stand dismissed.

¶17

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

¶18

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.

¶19

MAY 7, 2024/ kk

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/05/2024 at 11:45:08

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-2 v. M/S Tv Today Network Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)-2 v. M/S Tv Today Network Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Om Nanotech Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Rishi Kesh Chopra Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 70(1), Delhi & Anr.

Flowmore Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 28, New Delhi & Anr.

Pr. Commissioner of Income TAX-1 Vs M/S Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central -1 Vs Metro Tyres Ltd.

Raj Sheela Growth Fund (P) Ltd. Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 21(1), Delhi