MAHESH URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1, SOLAPUR, SOLAPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee bank disallowed an amount of Rs. 3,61,044/- for non-deduction of TDS on interest paid to nominal members. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance due to lack of evidence from the assessee.
What were the issues?
Whether disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) is justified for non-deduction of TDS on interest paid to nominal members, and if the assessee provided sufficient evidence.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Jalgaon District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. Union of India47 citing265 ITR 423 · 2004 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH, ‘A’ PUNE
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY
आदेश / ORDER
PER R.S. SYAL, VP :
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08-05-2023 passed by the CIT(A) in National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) Act in relation to the assessment year 2012-13.
The only issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of disallowance of Rs.3,61,044/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act on account of non-deduction of tax at source on interest paid to certain non-members who were registered as nominal members.
Tersely put, the facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer made the above disallowance on the reason that the assessee failed to deduct tax at source from the payment made to non- members on interest paid/credited. The ld. CIT(A) took note of the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in Jalgaon DCC Bank Ltd. Vs. Union of India 265 ITR 423 (Bom.) but did not provide any relief for the reason given in para 4.2 that “The appellant has not provided any evidence during the appellate proceeding to prove that the addition relates to members (Including nominal members).” Thus, it is evident that the ld. CIT(A) accepted, in principle, that the deduction of tax at source was not warranted in respect of payment of interest to members including nominal members. He, however, did not grant the suitable relief for the failure on the part of the assessee to furnish the details of interest paid. On the contrary, the ld. AR submitted that all such details were uploaded to the ld. CIT(A), who did not take cognizance of the same. In view of these facts, we are satisfied that the interest of justice would meet adequately if the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A). We order accordingly and direct him to decide the appeal afresh after allowing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 11th August, 2023.
More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)
- Rekha Agarwal, Jaipur vs ITO WD 4(1), JaipurITA 844/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Cdg Petchem Limited, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward - 1(1), HyderabadITA 1900/HYD/2025[2018-2019]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-2019
- M/S. Shree Laminators Ltd., Kolkata vs DCIT, Circle 4(4), KolkataITA 1534/KOL/2026[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-2012
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026