TAEWOONG LOGISTICS PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT (OSD) CORPORATE CIRCLE 3, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 990/CHNY/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 August 2018AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) disposed of the appeal without considering the material available, including tax-exempt certificates. Therefore, the issues were remitted back to the AO for fresh examination.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer disallowed certain charges for freight forwarding services on the grounds that the assessee failed to deduct tax at source under Section 194C. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of charges was justified due to non-deduction of TDS, and whether the CIT(A) properly considered the assessee's submissions and supporting documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 194C,Section 40(a)(ia),Section 172

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 Appellant: Shri Raghunathan Sampath, Advocate
Hearing: 02.08.2018Pronounced: 06.08.2018

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)-13, Chennai in dated 04.01.2018 for assessment year 2012-13.

2.

Taewoong Logistics P Ltd., the assessee, is engaged in the business of freight forwarding. While making the assessment for assessment year 2012- 13, the AO disallowed airline delivery order charges, container freight station charges, freight & delivery charges, insurance premium, international- air freight reimbursement etc., for the reason that the assessee failed to deduct the tax u/s. 194C and hence he invoked the provisions of section 40(a)(ia).

Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal.

3.

Aggrieved against the order, the assessee filed this appeal. The Ld. AR submitted, inviting our attention to the page 8 of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) that the Ld. CIT(A) forwarded the written submissions of the assessee to the AO for his remand report under rule 46A, thereafter, he sent reminders on various dates. Since, the AO has not availed the opportunity of sending the remand report, the Ld. CIT(A) disposed the case based on the written submissions. Inviting our attention to the page 10 of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) while disposing the appeal did not consider the assessee’s submissions that out of total shipping line expenses at Rs. 57,459,015/-, tax exempt certificates to the extent of 53,382,248/- issued u/s. 172 are available and for the balance amount of Rs. 4,076,767/- only tax exempt certificates are not available. The party wise breakup and copies of the tax exempt certificates are attached in the Anexure- A1 etc., and hence pleaded that since the facts involved on the issues are not :- 3 -: AO for a fresh examination, before whom, the assessee shall place all its materials in its support which was furnished before the Ld. CIT(A) etc., and prove its case.

Per contra, the Ld. DR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A).

4.

We heard the rival submissions. Since, the Ld. CIT(A) disposed the appeal without considering the material available before him, we are of the view that all the issues arising in this appeal are to be remitted back to the AO for 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 AO on due examination, after affording adequate opportunity to the assessee, shall decide the issues in accordance with law, afresh.

5.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on Monday, the 06th day of August, 2018 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 194C

All 2,696 judgments and leading authorities on Section 194C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →