Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Baakir Real Estates Pvt Ltd,Delhi vs Ito Ward-73(3), Delhi on 4 February, 2026
16IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH, 'E': NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT
AND
SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER
ITA No.3265/DEL/2025
[Assessment Year: 2017-18]
Baakir Real Estates Private Income Tax Officer,
Limited, 232-B, Fourth Floor, Ward-73(3), Room No.402, Fourth
Phase III, Okhla Industrial Estate, Vs Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Laxmi
Delhi-110020 Nagar District Centre,
New Delhi-110092
PAN-AADCB1340G
Appellant Respondent
Appellant/Assessee by Shri Shailesh Gupta, Adv.
Respondent/Revenue by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Adv.
Date of Hearing 02.02.2026
Date of Pronouncement 02.02.2026
ORDER
PER AMITABH SHUKLA, AM,
The captioned appeal has been preferred by the assessee against order dated 10.03.2025 of learned Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chandigarh, [hereinafter referred to as 'ld. CIT(A)] arising out of assessment order dated 24.02.2023 passed u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18.
ITA No.3265/Del/2025
2. The only issue in this appeal is against order of learned CIT(A) confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in raising demand of Rs.21,839/- under section 201(1) and demand of Rs.17,908/- under section 201(1A) of the Act.
3. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that the Assessing Officer received an information from DCIT, TDS Circle, Panchkula, whereby a survey under section 133A of the Act was carried in the office premise of Haryana Urban Development Authority (in short 'HUDA') by the TDS Wing of Panchkula on 09.02.2017 and 14.02.2017. During the course of survey, the survey team noted that HUDA has received External Development Charges (in short 'EDC') from private builders without deducting TDS, the Assessing Officer noted that that the assessee has made payment of Rs.10,91,970/- to HUDA as EDC without deducting TDS thereon. The details are as under:-
Nature of payment Date of payment Amount (Rs.) TDS deducted (Rs.) EDC amount paid to 10.05.2016 10,91,970 NIL HUDA Total 10,91,970 NIL
4. Therefore, the Assessing Officer taken the assessee under default under section 201(1) qua TDS deductible @2% under section 194C at Rs.21,839/-.
The Assessing Officer also charged interest under section 201(1A) @1% per month at Rs.17,908/-.
Page 2 of 4 ITA No.3265/Del/2025
5. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee before the ld. CIT(A) stated that this payment is neither paid nor claimed as expenses i.e. EDC charges but the ld. CIT(A) has not considered this and relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Puri Constructions Private Limited vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax in W.P.(C) No.9483/2019 and CM APPL 39041/2019 dated 13.02.2024 stated that the assessee is in default.
6. Aggrieved assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
7. Now before us, only claim made by the assessee was that the assessee neither made this payment nor claimed as expenses and when this was confronted to the ld. Sr. DR, she only requested that the matter may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification and she principally agreed that in case the payment is not made by the assessee and not claimed as expenses in its books of accounts, the Assessing Officer will allow the claim of the assessee.
8. After hearing both the parties and going through the facts and circumstances of the case, we remit this issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer with specific direction that the Assessing Officer will very whether the assessee has made payment of this EDC Charges and claimed deduction or not. In case, the assessee has claimed deduction, the Assessing Officer will disallow and in case, the assessee has not claimed in its books of accounts, the Assessing Page 3 of 4 ITA No.3265/Del/2025 Officer will not make any disallowance. In terms of the above, the matter is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer.
9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 02nd February, 2026.
Sd/- Sd/-
[MAHAVIR SINGH] [AMITABH SHUKLA]
VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 04.02.2026
f{x~{tÜ
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. PCIT
4. CIT(A)
5. DR
Asst. Registrar,
ITAT, New Delhi,
Page 4 of 4