Ita/88/2017 Of M/S Jabalpur Development Authority v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds)

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHI.T.A. No.88 / 2017 Jabalpur, Dated 10/01/2018 Shri Mukesh Agrawal, learned counsel for theappellant. Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for therespondents. Heard on the question of admission. This appeal has been filed by the appellantunder Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961being aggrieved by order dated 19.1.2017 passed bythe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur in ITANo.103/JAB/2016, for referring the followingsubstantial questions of law for decision to theTribunal:- “(b) Whether the appellant was required todeduct tax at source under section 194 LAof the Income Tax Act, wherein explanationto Section 194 LA of the Act specificallyexempts TDS on the payment made foracquisition of agricultural land?; and (c)Whether under Section 194 LA of theAct, an obligation can cast on a person distributing compensation to deduct tax atsource only in respect of payment forimmovable property whereas suchimmovable property does not includeagricultural land irrespective of itslocation?” The learned counsel for the appellant submitsthat the land acquired by the Jabalpur DevelopmentAuthority, for the purpose of bus stand and otherpurposes, was agricultural land at the time when itwas acquired. It is submitted that the appellant hadfiled the documents to establish this fact but neitherthe Assessing Authority nor the Appellate Authority orthe Tribunal has addressed this issue and recorded afinding in this regard. It is submitted that a finding onthis issue and an application of mind to the samewas necessary on account of the fact that theappellant is not required to deduct tax at sourceunder Section 194-LA of the Income Tax Act, in caseof acquisition of agricultural land. It is submitted thatthis aspect, though raised by the appellant before theAppellate Tribunal, has not been adverted to orconsidered by the authority, hence this appeal. The learned counsel for the Revenue, on theother hand, points out that the appellant did not raisethis issue or ground before the Commissioner,Appeals and raised it for the first time before theAppellate Tribunal and in such circumstances thesame was not required to be adverted to. Having heard the learned counsel for theparties at length we are of the considered opinionthat as the Tribunal is the final fact finding authorityand as the appellant had raised this issue before theTribunal, it was required to address itself to the saidissue and record a finding on that count more so asa decision on the aforesaid issue/ground would go tothe root of the matter and was necessary foradjudicating the dispute. In the circumstances, we find the aforesaidquestions of law namely; the substantial questions oflaw “b & c” do arise for consideration in the presentappeal and in view of the facts and circumstances ofthe case we consider and decide the same in favourof the appellant. Consequently, the appeal filed by the appellantis allowed and the impugned order dated 19.1.2017passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jabalpur in I.T.A No.103/JAB/2016 is set aside andthe matter is remitted back to the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal for reconsideration and decisionof the matter after duly taking into consideration theaforesaid issue/ground raised by the appellant. It is made clear that this Court has notexpressed any opinion on the aforesaid issue onmerit and therefore, the Tribunal would be at libertyto decide the matter after taking all the facts andfacets into consideration. With the aforesaid direction/observation theappeal filed by the appellant stands allowed anddisposed of. C.C. as per rules. (Ravi Shankar Jha) (Nandita Dubey) Judge Judge SJ Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Date: 2018.01.11 13:30:54 +05'30'