ROYAL UNIFORCE ROOFING PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 3, NAGPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since M/s. Manikgarh Cement was the manufacturer and seller of the goods, and they paid the actual freight to the truck operators, the assessee was not liable to deduct TDS on the freight charges included in the goods invoice.
What were the facts?
The assessee purchased cement from M/s. Manikgarh Cement, and freight charges were included in the invoice. The assessee did not deduct TDS on these freight charges. The Assessing Officer made a disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was required to deduct TDS on freight charges included in the purchase invoice of goods, and if not, whether the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR ‘SMC’ BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 is directed against the order dated 05.12.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) arising out of Assessment order dated 30.03.2022 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
The sole grievance of the assessee is against the disallowance for non-deduction of tax at source on the payment of Freight charges u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act paid to M/s. Manikgarh Cement at Rs.23,10,517/-.
2 Royal Uniforce Roofing Private Limited
I have heard the rival contentions a
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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 →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026