Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM
O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: This appeal of the assessee is arising out of order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)]-36, Mumbai [in short CIT(A)], in Appeal No. CIT(A)-36/IT-33/ACIT-20(2)/2013-14 vide dated 30.08.2019. The Assessment was framed by the Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 20(2), Mumbai (in short ACIT/ AO) for the A.Y. 2010-11 vide order dated 22.02.2013 under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).
“1. Under the facts and circumstances the learned CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of ₹393000/- being payments made by cheques to M/s. Pacific Digital for purchase of material, disallowed by the learned Assessing Officer treating payments to contractor for non-deduction of tax at source under section 194-C of I.T. Act.
1(a) The learned CIT(Appeals) as well as learned Assessing Officer failed to a appreciate that provisions of section 194C are not attracted for payments made for purchase of material for which Bills are produced. ”
We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that the Assessing Officer made disallowance of hoarding expenses of ₹3,93,000 paid to M/s Pacific Digital by invoking the provisions of section 194C of the Act. According to Assessing Officer, the assessee failed to deduct TDS on the payment made to M/s Pacific Digital on account of hoarding expenses, which are contractual in nature, for which TDS should have been deducted. As the TDS was not deducted, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and made disallowance. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before “4.3.3 With regard to payment made to Pacific Digital, the Assessing Officer confirmed that such payment was on account of material purchase. The Assessing Officer after verification stated that as per the provisions of section 194C(5) deduction is to be made from the amount of any sum credited or paid if it exceeds ₹30,000/ In the instant case, as the assessee has paid to the contractor more than ₹75,000/-, TDS under section 194 4C is deductible on this amount. The Assessing Officer is directed to give effect accordingly keeping in mind the findings with regard to non-deduction to TDS u/s 194C w.r.t. Pacific Digital.”
Aggrieved, now assessee is in appeal before Tribunal.
Before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee placed copy of remand report of the Assessing Officer dated 31.01.2019 which is enclosed at assessee’s paper book at pages 63 to 70 and the relevant finding is given in Para 5(iii)(b) at page 67 of the assessee’s paper book, which was read out by the learned Counsel for the assessee and the relevant para of remand report read as under:-