Case Law › High Court › Ita/390/2012 Of Director Of Income Tax v...

Ita/390/2012 Of Director Of Income Tax v. Jal Hotels Co Ltd

High Court 17 Jul 2012 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · dhcdb

Parties

Date of order

17 Jul 2012

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In Ita/390/2012 Of Director Of Income Tax v. Jal Hotels Co Ltd, the High Court (2012) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: The Appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

i $-2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI * rTA39012012 T' DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX Through: Mr. Sumit Kumar, [proxY ][for]\4r. Anupam Tripathi, Sr. Standing [Counsel.] ""' [Appellant] VEISUSJAL HOTELS CO LTD ..... Respondent T'hrough: None. CORAM:HON'BI,E MR. JUSTICE [S. ] HON'BLX] MR. JUSTICE [R.V.EASWAR] ORDERo 17.07.20L2 The question sought to be [urged ][for ][consideration ][in ][the present ][appeal, ][by ][the]Revenue, is the liability of [the non-resident ][asseessee ][to pay ][interest rurder Section-234B]of the Income Tax Act, [wherever ][the ][liability is ][not ][fulfilled ][by ][the ][payer, ][a ][resident]Indian. The Revenue is [aggrieved ][by ][the ][order ][of ][the ] [dated 29.09.2011 ][in ITA]No.864/Del.l20lI. The [assessment ][year ][in ][the present ][case ][is ][2006-2007 ][-] We have considered [the ][submissions. ][There ][is no ][doubt ][about ][the fact ][that ][the]assessee was non-resident [at the relevant ][time. The ][liability to ][deduct the ][tax from ][the]payrnent was that of its resident [customer ][or ][payer, ][an ][Indian ][resident.] This Cogrt notices that the [same ][question ][was ][considered ][and ][decided ][by ][the]Division Bench of the Court in [Director ][of ][Income ][.fax ][v. ][Jacob ][Civil ][Incorporated,](2011) 330 ITR 578. Indeed the I'IAT in [paragraph-6 ][of thc ][impugned order ][has ][noticed]a1d followed that decision. The [Court is, ][therefore, ][of ][the opinion ][that ][no ][substantial]question oflaw arises for consideration. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed. Il,'*U[t-tS. RAVINDRA BIIAT, J M*-t-TT.V.EASWAR, J JULY I7,2OI2 Signature Not Verified

Facing a similar income-tax issue?

Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.

✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA

This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.

Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.