S ANAND L/H OF LATE V SAMPATH,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 2, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1231/CHNY/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 September 2018AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not duly considered the assessee's claim regarding the firm accounting for income and paying taxes, as per the second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia). Therefore, the issue was set aside and remitted back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer disallowed a payment of Rs. 77,65,747/- made to a partnership firm for non-deduction of tax at source. The assessee argued that the firm had accounted for the income and paid taxes. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) is sustainable when the recipient firm has accounted for the income and paid taxes thereon, and whether the CIT(A) properly considered this aspect.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN

For Respondent: Shri G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni, JCIT
Hearing: 30.08.2018Pronounced: 25.09.2018

आदेश/ O R D E R

PER S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

The assessee filed this appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chennai in 2010-11/CIT(A)-2, dated 27.02.2018 for assessment year 2010-11.

2.

While making the assessment for assessment year 2010-11, in the case of late Shri Vasudevan Sampath, represented by legal heir Shri S. Anand, the Assessing Officer, inter alia, disallowed Rs. 77,65,747/- paid to M/s. Anand and Venkatesh, a partnership firm, without deducting tax at source u/s. 40a(ia).

Aggrieved against that order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) pleading, inter alia, that the payments made to M/s. Anand and Venkatesh was accounted and offered by them and they have paid the taxes due thereon. However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. Against which the assessee filed this appeal.

3.

At the time of hearing none appeared from the assessee side, though the hearing notice was served on assessee on 29.06.2018 and the acknowledgment was placed on the record.

4.

We heard the Ld. DR and find that the assessee’s above claim with M/s.

Anand and Venkatesh, towards which a confirmation letter was also filed before the Ld. CIT(A) have not been considered duly, in accordance with second proviso to section 40a(ia) and hence, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue alone and remit this issue back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination. The assessee shall place all the materials in its support before the AO and comply to the AO’s requirements as per law.

The A O is also free to conduct appropriate enquiry as deemed fit, but he shall furnish adequate opportunity to the assessee on the material etc to be :- 3 -: used against it and decide the matter in accordance with law. Subject to this findings, the assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed. 5.

Order pronounced on Tuesday, the 25th day of September, 2018 at Chennai.

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 →