Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”: HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”: HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA Nos. 125 & 126/H/2018 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 R.S. Brothers Retail India Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-tax, Circle – 2(1), PAN – AADCR 9381B Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Mohd. Afzal Revenue by: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey Date of hearing: 04/02/2021 Date of pronouncement: 23/02/2021
O R D E R PER BENCH: Both these appeals filed by same assessee are directed against CIT(A) – 8, Hyderabad’s common order dated 12/10/2017 for AYs 2015-16. As identical grounds are involved in these appeals, the same were clubbed and heard together and, therefore, a common order is passed for the sake of convenience.
:- 2 -: ITA Nos. 125 & 126 /Hyd/18 RS Brothers Retail India Pvt. Ltd.
To dispose of these appeals, we refer to the facts from AY 2015-16 and the grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals are common, except the quantum of addition, which are as under: “1. Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 8, Hyderabad [CIT(A)-8] has grossly erred in law and on facts.
Learned CIT (A) has grossly erred in sustaining the demand u / s 201 (1) on the basis of monthly average expenditure on shop maintenance and transport and further charging interest u/s 201(lA) on that basis. 3(a) Learned CIT (A) has erred in law in sustaining the order of the DCIT, Circle 2(1), Hyderabad (AO) that tax is deductible u/s 194C from expenses incurred on shop maintenance. (b) Learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that the shop maintenance expenses is liable to deduction u/s 194C is a finding of fact. AO has applied provisions of Sec 194C without any facts to support the application of those provisions. 4(a) Learned CIT (A) is not justified in holding that provisions of Sec 192 are applicable. (b) Learned CIT(A) is not correct in law or on facts in upholding clubbing of salary payments for purposes of application of Sec 192 of the Act. 5. Without prejudice to the above grounds, the facts and circumstances of the case composite order u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) is not valid in law. Order u/s 201(1) only is appealable u/s 246A of the IT Act. There is no
:- 3 -: ITA Nos. 125 & 126 /Hyd/18 RS Brothers Retail India Pvt. Ltd.
provision in law for raising demand u/s 201(1) on presumptive basis. 6. For these and any other grounds, it is prayed that the demand u Is 201 (1) & 201(lA) be deleted.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee engaged in the business of textile showrooms in the name and style of M/s RS Brother’s and M/s South India Shopping Mall in Hyderabad and other cities in AP. A survey i/s 133A of the IT Act conducted in the business premises of the assessee company on 14/09/2015. Consequent upon the survey proceedings, proceedings u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) were initiated for both the years under consideration. During the course of proceedings, DCIT (TDS) observed that in certain expenses paid by the assessee, TDS provisions have not been complied by the assessee. Accordingly, he calculated the TDS required to be paid and interest thereon as per section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act and raised the demand.
Against the order of DCIT(TDS), the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) and assessee did not appear
:- 4 -: ITA Nos. 125 & 126 /Hyd/18 RS Brothers Retail India Pvt. Ltd.
before the CIT(A) and accordingly confirmed the order of DCIT(TDS).
Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. At the outset, ld. AR of the assessee requested the Bench to remand the matter back to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the issue in dispute on merits as the assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) and present its case. He further undertook that the assessee will appear before the CIT(A) and present its case without any fail.
The ld. DR has not objected to the submissions made by the ld. AR of the assessee for remanding the matter to CIT(A). 8. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record as well as gone through the orders of revenue authorities. In the interest of justice, we remit the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the issue in dispute as per the TDS provisions under the IT Act. The
:- 5 -: ITA Nos. 125 & 126 /Hyd/18 RS Brothers Retail India Pvt. Ltd.
assessee is directed to produce documents in support of its case and directed to appear before the CIT(A) without seeking any adjournments. The CIT(A) shall provide three effective opportunities to the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds raised in both the appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Pronounced in the open court on 23rd February, 2021.
Sd/- Sd/- (S.S. GODARA) (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Hyderabad, Dated: 23rd February, 2021 Kv
:- 6 -: ITA Nos. 125 & 126 /Hyd/18 RS Brothers Retail India Pvt. Ltd.
copy to : 1 M/s RS Brothers Retail India Pvt. Ltd., D.No. 7-2-1740, Ware House No. 14 & 15 KSP Ware Housing Complex, Opp. Fire Station, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad. 2 DCIT(TDS) , Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. 3 CIT(A) – 8, Hyderabad. Pr. CIT - I, Hyderabad 4 ITAT, DR, Hyderabad. 5 6 Guard File.