Case Law Details
Sh. Harpal Singh Vs DCIT (ITAT Chandigarh)
The issue under consideration is whether interest u/s 201(1A) will be levied on assessee even if NRI seller had already paid taxes as per his return?
ITAT states that, there are two persons under the Act liable to pay interest on tax on the same income. The legislature would not have contemplated such a situation where in respect of the tax on interest income, two persons are liable to pay interest for the delayed payment of tax. We are, therefore, inclined to hold that whatever there is a possibility of a deduction of tax at source, the person who had /ailed to deduct tax at source is liable to pay interest and not the assesses as otherwise, there will be charging of interest twice on the payment of tax in relation to the same income, Such an interpretation should normally be avoided. It was held, in fact, the first two sentence of this Para go against the assessee, which says that an authority which is bound to make a deduction of tax at source as per statute, if does not deduct, or after deducting fails to pay the tax, than such a person or authority is liable to pay simple Interest on the amount of tax not deducted. This shows that, liability of the tax deductor is absolute. The assessee who should be the deductor as per statute failed to deduct taxes and is seeking to benefit itself by claiming the benefits which are available to the deductee. Hence, keeping in view the provisions of the Act and facts of the case ITAT hold that the interest under section 201(1)(A) has been rightly confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A).
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
The present Appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-43, New Delhi dt. 30/12/2015.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
