S. 194-I Income Tax Act | TDS Cant Be Deducted In Absence Of Payment Of Rent: Orissa High Court

S. 194-I Income Tax Act | TDS Cant Be Deducted In Absence Of Payment Of Rent

Case: Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhubaneswar v. Western Electricity Supply Company of Odisha Limited (WESCO) & Other Connected Matters

Coram: Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Justice R.K. Pattanaik

Case No.: ITA No. 4 of 2011

Court Observation: “In absence of there being any payment of rent or even deemed rent by the Respondents to OPTCL there was no obligation under Section 194-I of the IT Act to deduct TDS from the wheeling charges paid to OPTCL.”

“The assessees have not used anything belonging to OPTCL nor the assessees are a party in the petition filed by OPTCL to OERC for the fixation of the tariff. If the assessees were paying rent or were using any equipments of OPTCL, then assesse should have been a party before the OERC in respect of the fixation of the price in the case of OPTCL. This is because the assessee would be an affected party. The assessees are only a party in the fixation of the price between the Gridco and assessees and it in that order that a parallel identical direction is also available in para 37 and 294 and 295 of the order in the case of Gridco. Thus, it is evident that the raising of invoices by OPTCL on the assesse is for the purpose of raising for first change on the receipts of Gridco and for no other purposes. As mentioned above, the assessees have not used any of the equipments of OPTCL and in absence of use in any manner whatsoever, of the equipments of OPTCL by the assessee, no rent can be deemed to have been paid for the purpose of invoking of section 194(I) of the Act.”

Previous Posts

Article 22(5) | Detenue Must Be Conveyed Time-Limit Within Which He Can Make Representation Against Detention: J&K&L High Court

Gujarat High Court Distinguished Between Public Order and Law and Order; Releases Detenue under NDPS Act

Right of Accused to Cross-Examine Prosecutrix Cant Always Be Denied Only Because of Section 33(5), POCSO Act: Uttarakhand High Court

Article 226 – High Court Cannot Direct Regularisation of Temporary Employees by Creating Supernumerary Posts: Supreme Court

Disciplinary Proceedings Can Be Quashed In Entirety Only When Show-Cause Notice Is Bad: Meghalaya High Court

CPC – Application To Amend Admissions Can Be Entertained Even After Judgment Is Reserved Under Order XII Rule 6: Delhi High Court Download Judgement