RAJALAKSHMI RENEABL;ES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITO,CORPORATE WARD-5(4), CHENNAI

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 12-09-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 29-10-2019. The sole grievance of the assessee is disallowance of interest of Rs.96.63 Lacs u/s.40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source u/s.194A. The registry has noted delay of 18 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR. Considering the period of delay, the delay is condoned.

From case records, it emerges that the assessee’s case was selected for ‘limited scrutiny’ vide notice u/s 143(2) dated 23-08-2018, a copy of which is on record. The point to be covered therein was to examine ‘expenses incurred for earning exempt income’. The case was subsequently transferred from corporate circle 6(1) to Corporate Ward 5(4) as per intimation dated 05-09-2018 and a fresh notice u/s 143(2) was issued to examine the said issue. After considering assessee’s submissions, Ld. AO made assessment wherein Ld. AO proposed penalty u/s 271B, made disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) as well as another disallowance u/s 14A. Upon further appeal, the assessee did not make any effective representation. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) on the ground that the assessee failed to furnish the copies of Form 26A. The disallowance u/s 14A was also confirmed. The ground relating to initiation of penalty u/s 271B was dismissed. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. The Ld. AR sought another opportunity of hearing before Ld. CIT(A) and also submitted that the only issue to be examined by Ld. AO in ‘limited scrutiny’ was to determine ‘expenses incurred for earning exempt income’ and nothing beyond. The impugned disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) as well as initiation of penalty u/s 271B was beyond the scope of limited scrutiny in terms of CBDT instruction No.5/2016 dated 14-07- 2016 as well as Circular F.No.225/402/2018/ITA.II dated 28-11-2018. The Ld. AR also submitted that a specific ground was raised in that respect before Ld. CIT(A) which has not been adjudicated. It has also been submitted that the assessee is in a position to submit copies of Form 26A. 5. Accepting the various arguments of Ld. AR, keeping all the issues open, we remit the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its stand forthwith. 6. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 13th May, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) �ाियक सद4 / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद4 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे5ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 13-05-2024 DS आदेशकीNितिलिपअ/ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु>/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडCफाईल/GF