{"id":1612,"date":"2010-05-04T12:53:34","date_gmt":"2010-05-04T07:23:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/?p=1612"},"modified":"2010-05-04T12:53:34","modified_gmt":"2010-05-04T07:23:34","slug":"larsen-toubro-ltd-vs-acit-bombay-high-court-s-197-tds-high-court-censures-dept-for-cavalier-approach","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/larsen-toubro-ltd-vs-acit-bombay-high-court-s-197-tds-high-court-censures-dept-for-cavalier-approach\/","title":{"rendered":"Larsen &#038; Toubro Ltd vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)"},"content":{"rendered":"<table width=\"150\" border=\"0\" align=\"right\">\n<tr>\n<td><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/?dl_id=190\" onclick=\"if (event.button==0) \r\n     setTimeout(function () { window.location = 'http:\/\/itatonline.org\/downloads.php?varname=dl_id=190&varname2=LT_197_TDS.pdf'; }, 100)\" ><strong>Click here to download the judgement (LT_197_TDS.pdf) <\/strong> <\/a><\/p><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<p><strong> S. 197 TDS: High Court censures Dept for cavalier approach<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The assessee, a consortium, was awarded a contract by MMRDA for the monorail project. The assessee filed an application u\/s 197 for a certificate that MMRDA be directed to deduct tax at 0.11% on the ground that the percentage of total tax liability to revenue was estimated to be 0.11%. The AO rejected the application on the ground that Rule 28AA required figures for three previous years which were unavailable and no eTDS returns were filed by the assessee. A revision application filed u\/s 264 was rejected by the CIT on the ground that (i) an order rejecting a s. 197 application is not an &#8220;order&#8221; for purposes of s. 264 and (ii) by not giving the benefit of a lower rate for withholding u\/s 197, <strong>no hardship or prejudice<\/strong> is caused to the assessee as the assessee would get a refund of the excess tax paid, if any, with interest. On a Writ Petition filed by the assessee, HELD, censuring the department:<\/p>\n<p>(i) <strong>It is far fetched to accept the view that the rejection of a s. 197 application lies in the absolute discretion of the AO or that the AO is not bound to indicate reasons for the rejection of the application<\/strong>. The AO cannot be heard to urge that though an assessee fulfills all the requirements which are stipulated in Rule 28AA\/29B, he possesses an unguided discretion to reject the application. In rejecting an application, he is bound to furnish reasons which demonstrate application of mind to the germane. Hence, <strong>It is impossible to accept the view that the rejection of an application u\/s 197 does not result in an order<\/strong>. The expression \u201corder\u201d for purposes of s. 264 has a wide connotation and includes a determination by the AO on an application u\/s 197; <\/p>\n<p> (ii) The manner in which the application has been dealt with by the AO and the CIT <strong>leaves much to be desired<\/strong>. The approach of the CIT that no prejudice is caused to the assessee as the excess TDS would be refunded is <strong>specious<\/strong> because if the conditions for grant of a certificate u\/s 197 are fulfilled, it was impermissible for the AO to reject the application merely on a <strong>whim and on caprice<\/strong> and for the CIT to hold that <strong>no prejudice is caused to the assessee<\/strong> since the TDS would be refunded later with interest. &#8220;<em><strong>We are constrained to observe that the application filed by the assessee has been rejected in a rather cavalier manner and without application of mind to circumstances which are germane to the statute<\/strong><\/em>&#8220;.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p><strong>It is far fetched to accept the view that the rejection of a s. 197 application lies in the absolute discretion of the AO or that the AO is not bound to indicate reasons for the rejection of the application<\/strong>. The AO cannot be heard to urge that though an assessee fulfills all the requirements which are stipulated in Rule 28AA\/29B, he possesses an unguided discretion to reject the application. In rejecting an application, he is bound to furnish reasons which demonstrate application of mind to the germane. Hence, <strong>It is impossible to accept the view that the rejection of an application u\/s 197 does not result in an order<\/strong>. The expression \u201corder\u201d for purposes of s. 264 has a wide connotation and includes a determination by the AO on an application u\/s 197<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/larsen-toubro-ltd-vs-acit-bombay-high-court-s-197-tds-high-court-censures-dept-for-cavalier-approach\/\">Read more &#8250;<\/a><\/div>\n<p><!-- end of .read-more --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[4,5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1612","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-all-judgements","category-high-court"],"acf":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1612","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1612"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1612\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1612"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1612"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1612"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}