ITO Vs Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd (ITAT Mumbai)
The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal examined an appeal challenging the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) passed under section 248 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, concerning denial of relief from tax deduction at source on a foreign remittance of ₹87,20,271. At the hearing, the Revenue raised a preliminary objection that the Commissioner (Appeals) had decided the matter without granting an opportunity of hearing to the Assessing Officer, which was asserted to be mandatory under section 250. The Revenue argued that the Assessing Officer, being the authority responsible for determining tax withholding on foreign remittances, was bypassed entirely, thereby vitiating the appellate proceedings.
The assessee contended that an appeal under section 248 is materially distinct, as it allows a payer who has borne and paid tax under section 195 to seek a declaration that no tax was deductible, without requiring a prior determination by the Assessing Officer. It was further argued that section 250 requires notice of hearing only to the Assessing Officer against whose order the appeal is preferred, and since the appeal was not against any Assessing Officer’s order, no statutory requirement existed to hear the Assessing Officer. The assessee also urged that the issue on merits was already covered in its favour and that technical objections should not prolong litigation.
