SUNAND SHARMA,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD - 20(4), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 243/DEL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 August 2022AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without deciding on merits and without following the procedural requirements of Section 250(6). The assessee claimed to have provided all necessary TDS details.

What were the facts?

The assessee declared income and the AO made disallowances under Section 14A and Section 40(a)(ia) for rent paid without TDS. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without a decision on merits and proper procedure. Whether the assessee had provided sufficient details regarding TDS on rent.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 40(a)(ia),Section 250(6),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘H’ NEW DLEHI

Before: SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI & SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY

For Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 03.08.2022

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 06.01.2017, impugned herein, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-16, New Delhi (in short “Ld. Commissioner”), u/s. 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the assessment year 2012-13.

2.

Brief facts, relevant for adjudication of the instant appeal are that the Assesseedeclared the incomeof Rs.2,43,80,840/- by filling its return of income on dated 15.09.2012, which was taken into consideration by the Assessing Officer, who vide Assessment Order dated 27-3-2015 u/s. 143(3) of the Act, made a disallowance of Rs.20,370/- u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D, as per calculation of disallowance filed by the Assessee itself.

Further the AO also made the disallowance of Rs.9,00,000/- u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act on the premisethat during the year under consideration, the Assesseehad paid rent to the tune of Rs.9,00,000/- in respect of Udai Farm without deducting tax at source and had not furnished any details to support its claim and that in the immediately preceding assessment year, had a turnover of Rs.1,55,76,963/- and therefore, the Assessee was liable to deduct tax at source on the rent paid.

3.

The Assessee challenged the Assessment Order dated 27-3- 2015 in first appeal before the ld. Commissioner, who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal of the Assessee in limineon the ground that the Assessee has remained totally non-compliant and no evidence were placed in support of his assertions.

4.

Being aggrieved, the Assessee is in appeal before us, inter alia, contending that the Assessing Officer has written a wrong fact that no details with respect to tax deduction at source on the rent paid were filed whereas the Assessee vide letter dated 27.03.2015 had filed the copy of rent agreement with all the details of TDS paid by ALSTOM on behalf of the Assessee (copies placed at pages no. 25 to 40 of the paper book); and that the ld. Commissioner has decided the appeal of the Assessee ex-parte without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard.

5.

On the contrary the Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below.

6.

Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the Assesseeonly considering the non- compliance on behalf of the Assessee. However, while dismissing the appeal of the Assessee, he has failed to state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision as required under sub-section (6) of Section 250 of the Act, meaning thereby, no decision has been given on merits of the case. Keeping in view the contention of the Assessee that all the requisite details were furnished on 27/03/2015 before the Assessing Officer regarding the tax deduction at source on the rent paid which the Assessing Officer has stated to have not been produced and the impugned order, having not been passed on merits of the case, we deem it expedient in the interest of justice to remand the case back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for decision afresh on merits,suffice to say while giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.

The Assessee is also directed to cooperate with the appellate proceedings and to appear before the ld. Commissioner as and when would be required. The Assessee shall be at liberty to furnish all the details regarding TDS, which are stated to have been produced before the AO but not considered while passing the Assessment Order dated 27/03/2015.

Ordered accordingly.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →