NARESH H. BHANSALI,MUMBAI vs. ITO 15 (1)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3707/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 August 2019AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that while the transporter's PAN was provided, the assessee failed to submit the required information in the prescribed format under Section 194C(7). Therefore, the issue was set aside and remitted back to the Assessing Officer for verification.

What were the facts?

The assessee made payments to transport agencies without deducting TDS. The Assessing Officer disallowed these expenses under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee contended that they had furnished the transporters' PAN and believed TDS was not required as per Section 194C(7).

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) is justified when PAN of the transporter is provided but the information in the prescribed format under Section 194C(7) is not filed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 194C,Section 194C(7)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI

Hearing: 13.08.2019Pronounced: 21.08.2019

O R D E R महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य/ PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal of assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, Mumbai in appeal No. CIT(A)- 30/19(2)94)/561/2014-15 dated 15.03.2018. The Assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(1)(3) Mumbai (in short ITO/ AO) for the A.Y. 2011-12 vide dated 29.03.2014, under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).

2.

The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the disallowance made by Assessing Officer of payments made to transport agencies without deduction of TDS and hence Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. For this assessee has raised the following ground: - 2 “1) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax-Act, 1961 by the Ld. Assessing Officer of the payments of Rs. 8,46,341/- made to the transport agencies without appreciating that the Assessee has not deducted TDS on the said payments under the bonafide belief that he need not to deduct the TDS as per the Law he furnished the PAN of the Transporter agencies as per provisions 194C(7); therefore, in the absence of any deliberate failure by the Appellant, no disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) is called for.”

3.

We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that the AO added transportation charges amounting to ₹ 8,46,341/- paid to M/s Ronak Transport and M/s Tridev Transport company as the assessee failed to deduct TDS under section 194C of the Act and thereby made disallowance by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A). Before CIT(A) assessee contended that the assessee has furnished ledger copies of the transporters, quarterly TDS returns and proof of PAN. He stated that once the PAN number has been submitted, no disallowance should have been made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act in view of the provisions of Section 194C(7) of the Act.

4.

We have gone through the provisions of section 194C(6), which states that if assessee has PAN, does not require to deduct TDS while making payment to the transporters. The transporter/ contractor has furnished PAN card copies to the assessee and assessee by virtue of clause (6) of section 194C of the Act, the assessee did not deduct TDS while making payments to the transporters. We noted that as per clause

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →