KARMYOGI SHANKARRAOJI PATIL SSK LTD,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 7, PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with one more opportunity to submit details. The CIT(A) is directed to call for a remand report and adjudicate the issue afresh after giving an opportunity of rebuttal to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee, an Association of Persons, declared Nil income. The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 2,89,72,480/- under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS under Section 194Q on purchase of goods. The CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance as the assessee failed to provide details.
What were the issues?
Whether the disallowance made for non-deduction of TDS under Section 194Q was justified. Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 40(a)(ia),Section 194Q,Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2023-24 is directed against the order dated 07.11.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment order dated 21.03.2025 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act.
The sole issue for our consideration is that whether ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act at Rs.2,89,72,480/-.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before us. We notice that assessee is an Association of persons registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 and filed its return of income for A.Y. 2023-24 on 27.10.2023 declaring Nil income. Case selected for scrutiny through CASS followed by validly serving statutory notices for carrying out reassessment proceedings. In the course of assessment proceedings, after considering the submissions filed by the assessee, ld. Assessing Officer concluded the proceedings making disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act for non deduction of tax at source u/s.194Q of the Act with regard to the purchase of goods, value of which exceeds Rs.50.00 lakh and that the tax @0.1% of such sum exceeding Rs.50.00 lakh is required to be deducted. Ld. Assessing Officer made disallowance for non-deduction of tax u/s.194Q of the Act at Rs.2,89,72,480/- being 30% of the purchase of Rs.9,65,74,932/-. Income assessed at Rs.2,89,72,840/-. We further observe that assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but failed to respond to the notices of hearing on 18.07.2025, 23.09.2025, 08.10.2025. Assessee sought adjournment on two occasions however assessee did not file any details before ld.CIT(A) in support of its grounds of appeal and failed to discharge its burden. Thus, ld.CIT(A) affirmed the action of the Assessing Officer.
Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has prayed for affording one more opportunity so that the details can be submitted even though ld. DR has strongly opposed the submissions, we in the larger interest of justice deem it appropriate to restore the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) giving one more opportunity to the assessee. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Ld.CIT(A) shall call for a remand report from the ld. Juri ictional Assessing Officer and after giving opportunity of rebuttal to the assessee, shall adjudicate the issues in accordance with law. Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 28th day of July, 2026. (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 28th July, 2026. Satish
Satish Kumar Madishetty आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.
The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “A” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,
////
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
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Laxman Singh Yadav vs. Bank Of BarodaMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Surendra Singh Rathore vs. Idfc First Bank Through Branch ManagerMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026