Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABRAHAM P.GEORGE & SHRI GEORGE MATHAN
आदेश / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Madurai, in dated 25.11.2014 for the AY 2011-12.
Ms.D.Kumutha, JCIT, represented on behalf of the Revenue and Mr.Meenakshisundaram, Adv., represented on behalf of the assessee.
It was submitted by the Ld.DR that in the course of the assessment, the AO had disallowed the commission payments on which tax was deducted but not paid within the time allowed by invoking the provisions of Sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act. It was a submission that on appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) had deleted the disallowance by holding that the issue was covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Shri T.Mathimaran Vs. DCIT, in dated 23.09.2014, wherein, it had been held that the disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) applies only to those amounts which were payable and not, which were paid. It was a submission that the issue of paid, payable, now, stood reversed by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Palam Gas Service reported in [2017] 81 taxmann.com 43 (SC), wherein, the Hon’ble Supreme Court categorically held that the word ‘payable’ occurring in Sec.40(a)(ia) not only covers cases where amount is yet to be paid but also those cases where amount has actually been paid. It was a submission that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) was liable to be reversed.
In reply, the Ld.AR admitted that the issue was covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Palam Gas Service.
However, it was a submission that the issue on merits was liable to be restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. It was a submission that consequently, Ground Nos.10 to 21 of the assessee’s appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) has not been adjudicated. It was a submission that the issue was liable to be restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
We have considered the rival submissions.
As it is noticed that the Ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds on merits but has adjudicated the only issue on legal issues which now stand reversed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Palam Gas Service, the issues on merits in respect of the disallowance in this appeal are restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on merits
In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes.