Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND Dr. M.L. MEENA
आदेश /O R D E R
PER BENCH:
This appeal by assessee is arising out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Chennai in dated 13.12.2019. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward 6(2), Chennai for the assessment year 2012-13 u/s.147 r.w.s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) vide order dated 12.12.2018.
At the outset, ld.counsel for the assessee drew our attention to grounds of appeal
and he fairly agreed that he is not prosecuting the ground of reopening i.e., Ground Nos.1 to 5. Hence, these grounds are dismissed as not argued.
3. The solitary issue remains is as regards to disallowance of transport charges of Rs.1,20,930/-, disallowance of warehousing charges of Rs.10,26,000/- paid to Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd., and disallowance of warehousing charges paid to All Cargo Global amounting to Rs.4,98,000/- for non-deduction of TDS u/s.194 of the Act by invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. For this, assessee has raised Ground Nos.6 to 11, which need not to be reproduced.
We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that the AO disallowed transportation charges of Rs.1,20,930/-, warehousing charges paid to Balmer Lawrie amounting to Rs.10,26,882/- and warehousing charges paid to All Cargo Global amounting to Rs.4,98,685/- for non-deduction of TDS and thereby AO invoked provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) also confirmed the action of AO. Aggrieved, now assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
Before us, the only plea made was that the matter can be referred back to the AO for verifying the applicability of second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and in case, the recipients have declared these charges i.e., transportation charges and warehousing charges in their respective return of income, the same can be directed to be allowed. The ld. Senior DR has not raised any objection for this. We are of the view that the AO can verify whether the recipients have offered these expenses as income to tax and for that the assessee will file relevant details as prescribed under the second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act before the AO. The AO by virtue of judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd., 377 ITR 635 will consider the claim of assessee and accordingly decide the same. In view of the above, we set aside the orders of lower authorities on this issue on merit and restore the issue back to the file of the AO in term of the above directions.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the court on 9th March, 2022 at Chennai.