REWARD IMPEX PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 21(3), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3954/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 August 2021AY 2013-142 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order. To ensure justice, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, with a direction for the assessee to comply promptly.

What were the facts?

The assessee, involved in trading and exporting, paid Rs. 2,32,76,060/- as commission to a foreign agent. The Assessing Officer disallowed this expense due to non-deduction of TDS on the payment.

What were the issues?

Whether commission paid to a foreign agent is disallowable for non-deduction of TDS. The procedural aspect of the CIT(A) passing an ex-parte order was also a key consideration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(i)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: Sh. Kul BharatDr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Respondent: Ms. Mrinalini Sapra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 23.08.2021Pronounced: 26.08.2021

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

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-38, New Delhi dated 20.09.2017.

2.

Following grounds have been raised by the assessee:

“1. Whether ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts off the case in disallowing the appeal and upholding the disallowance of Rs.2,32,76,060/- made by the ld. AO on account of commission paid by the assessee company during the year.”

2 Reward Impex Pvt. Ltd. 3. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed its return of income through online on 30.09.2013 declaring an income of Rs.2,49,792/-. The assessee company was involved in the business of Trading & Exporting fabrics, readymade garments etc. and other merchandise. The assessee has paid commission of Rs.2,32,76,060/- to foreign agent. The Assessing Officer disallowed the commission expenses of Rs.2,32,76,060/- owing to non-deduction of TDS to the foreign party.

4.

The ld. CIT (A) confirmed the addition vide order dated 20.09.2017 passed ex-parte. Before us, the Director of the company appeared and submitted that given an opportunity he would ensure proper compliance before the ld. CIT (A). Hence, we hold that interests of justice would be well served if the matter is remanded back to the file of ld. CIT (A) for adjudication on merits. We also hereby direct the assessee to comply to the notices issued by the ld. CIT (A) promptly without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 26/08/2021.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(i)

All 2,009 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(i) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →