ASSOCIATED FABRICATORS,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 48(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2524/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 April 2018AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the issue of disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) to the Assessing Officer for verification, as the payees had disclosed the income and paid taxes. The other grounds were dismissed as not pressed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The assessee raised grounds regarding violation of natural justice, disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia), and ad-hoc disallowance of expenditure.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex-parte order and whether the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) was warranted when the payees had offered the income for taxation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Associated Fabricators.…………………….………………………………………….…………………….…….Appellant C/o D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2, Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [PAN: AAFFA 4355 H] Income Tax Officer, Ward-48(4), Kolkata…………....……….………………………………………Respondent Appearances by: Shri Pijush Mukherjee, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Shri Miraj D. Shah, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Date of concluding the hearing : March 12th, 2018 Date of pronouncing the order : April 13th , 2018 ORDER Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM :-

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Kolkata, (hereinafter the ‘Ld. CIT(A)’), dt. 31/07/2017, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), relating to Assessment Year 2009-10.

2.

The assessee has taken three grounds. The first being violation of principles of natural justice. The second is against the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act and the third is against ad-hoc disallowance of expenditure claimed. The ld. CIT(A) in this case has passed an ex-parte order for non-prosecution. The ld. CIT(A) should have passed an order on merits.

3.

Be it as it may, the assessee submits that the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act, is not called for, as the payees have disclosed this receipt as their income in their return of income and paid taxes thereon. This aspect needs verification. Hence, we set aside this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification and fresh adjudication, in accordance with law, after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

4.

The other grounds relating to natural justice and disallowance of various expenditures have not been pressed. Hence, they are dismissed as not pressed.

2 Associated Fabricators Assessment Year: 2009-10

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

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 →