Court: Mumbai bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal
Citation: Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2010-TII-ITAT-MUM-INTL)
Brief- Recently, the Mumbai bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal) in the case of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2010-TII-ITAT-MUM-INTL) dealt with the issue of whether passing of an order by the AO is necessary for filing an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] under section 248 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for a declaration that no tax was deductible on such income. The Tribunal held that Section 248 of the Act does not require any order being passed by the AO as a condition precedent for filing an appeal before CIT(A) . Further, the taxpayer also fulfilled all the necessary conditions required by the provision of the Act. Therefore, the taxpayer was right in filing an appeal before the CIT (A).
Facts of the case
- · The taxpayer company, during the assessment year 2007-08 entered into an agreement with a Japanese company for the consideration of USD 150,000. While remitting the money to the Japanese company, the taxpayer deducted tax under Section 195 of the Act and paid such sum to the Government of India.
- · Subsequently, the taxpayer filed an appeal before the CIT(A) under section 248 of the Act for a declaration that it was not liable to deduct tax from the remittance. However, the CIT(A), after relying on an order of the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. ADIT [2007] 106 ITD 521 (Mum) , held that since the taxpayer did not file an application to AO for a nil or lower withholding certificate under Section 195(2) of the Act there was no appealable order passed by the AO. Accordingly, the CIT(A) rejected the taxpayer’s application.
Tribunal’s ruling
