THAKUR VAIDYANATH AIYAR & CO.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 61(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5990/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 March 2022AY 2014-153 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that no addition was called for regarding the reconciliation of P&L and Service Tax. It also allowed the appeal on the ground of TDS being deposited before the due date. The Tribunal further allowed the appeal on sundry creditors and deleted ad-hoc disallowances for lack of reasons.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order concerning discrepancies in P&L and Service Tax returns, TDS payable, sundry creditors, and ad-hoc disallowances. The assessee explained the differences in service tax payments and credited fees to various branches. TDS was deposited before the due date of return filing.

What were the issues?

Whether discrepancies in service tax payments and P&L reconciliation warrant additions. Whether TDS deposited before the due date of return filing should be allowed as a deduction. Whether ad-hoc disallowances without reasons are valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Saktijit DeyDr. B. R. R. Kumar

Hearing: 07.03.2022Pronounced: 11.03.2022

Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-20, New Delhi dated 05.07.2018.

Reconciliation of P&L Account and Service Tax Return:

2.

We find that the difference of Rs.5,61,500/- is due to the fact that the service tax is paid at Delhi but the fee is credited to other branches where service taxes not paid. Such amount pertain to Mumbai Branch for Rs.3,24,500/-, Kolkata Branch for Rs.1,87,000/- and KN Gupta partner for Rs.50,000/-. Though, the sum of Rs.50,000/- is the amount received from NASSCOM for the partner KN Gupta which was included in the turnover of 2 Thakur Vaidyanath Aiya & Co. Delhi office. Hence, owing to the reconciliation no addition is called for on this account.

TDS Payable: (Ground Nos. 2 & 3)

3.

From the record, we find that the TDS has been deposited before due date of filing of the return. Hence, keeping in view, the order of the ITAT Delhi Benches in 1266, 1267, 1383, 1384 & 1392/Del/2021 dated 28.02.2022, we allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground.

Sundry Creditor:

4.

The items of sundry creditors found to be having overlapping of Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as found out from the table mentioned at page no. 21 of the order of the ld. CIT(A) which includes TDS, salary TDS, Voluntary PF, and others include Staff balance & payables at Chennai Branch. These amounts are reconciled before us and also do not interfere with the cash system of accounting followed by the assessee. Hence, we allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground.

Adhoc Disallowances:

5.

The AO resorted to adhoc disallowances on travelling, postage, conveyance and general expenses. We find that no reasons have been given by the revenue authorities for such disallowance and hence keeping in view the order of the ld. CIT(A) as well as the ITAT for the A.Y. 2013-14, we hereby delete the disallowance made by the AO.

3 Thakur Vaidyanath Aiya & Co.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 11/03/2022.

More judgments on Section 43B

All 7,161 judgments and leading authorities on Section 43B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →