DCIT Vs PVR Inox Ltd. (ITAT Delhi)
The only issue in dispute was whether Common Area Maintenance (CAM) charges paid by PVR Inox were subject to TDS u/s 194C or 194I. CIT(A) had held that CAM charges are contractual in nature and fall u/s 194C, not 194I.
The Tribunal noted that this very issue had already been decided in the assessee’s favour in its own earlier years (AYs 2011–12 & 2012–13), where the ITAT held:
- Lease rentals are covered under Section 194I (rent).
- CAM charges, being separate operational/maintenance services, fall under Section 194C (contractual payments).
Since the facts remained identical and Revenue could not show any contrary judgment, the Tribunal followed its earlier ruling and upheld that CAM charges attract TDS u/s 194C only.
Result: Revenue’s appeal partly allowed for statistical purposes; AO directed to recompute CAM-related TDS in line with Sections 194I (rent) and 194C (CAM).
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, Delhi [‘Ld. CIT(A) ’ for short] dated 07/03/2025 pertaining to Assessment Year 2016-17.
2. The solitary issue involved in the present Appeal as to whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that common area maintenance charges paid by the Assessee are in the nature of contractual payment and are liable to be deducted TDS u/s 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) or not?.
