Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Mumbai
Before: Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pawan Singh (JM)
The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.11.2014 passed by the learned CIT(A)-13, Mumbai and it relates to A.Y. 2006-07. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of the learned CIT(A) in confirming the addition of ` 21,16,127/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee and we noticed from the record that the assessee is not claiming notices sent by the Registry. Accordingly we notice that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex-parte, without presence of the assessee.
We heard learned Departmental Representative and perused the record. We noticed that the assessee has paid labour charges of ` 21,16,127/- and the Assessing Officer asked the assessee to submit the details of tax deducted at source from the above said payment as per provisions of the Act. The assessee
2 Percept Finserve P. Ltd. did not furnish the details and hence the Assessing Officer proceeded to disallow the above said amount u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source. Before the learned CIT(A) also assessee did not furnish any details and hence he confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer.
Before us also the assessee did not furnish any details to controvert the order of the learned CIT(A). Under these set of facts, we have no other option but to confirm the order passed by the learned CIT(A).
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
Order has been pronounced in the Court on 25.10.2016