Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”, BENCH MUMBAI
Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA
आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘एस.एम.सी’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आमकय अऩीर सं./ (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-2008) M/s South Carrying Corporation, Vs. ITO Ward-3(3), Thane A-201, Royal Crown, Opp. Municipal School No.13, Khopat Road, Thane (W)-400601 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AATFS 3130 J (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Rajendra Sawale, Kishore Poddar याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 11/08/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date of Pronouncement 24/10/2016 आदेश / O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A) for assessment year 2007-2008, wherein the assessee is aggrieved for disallowance of Rs.31,87,641/- u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act.
Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. Facts in brief are that disallowance has been made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act for non deduction of TDS u/s.194C on the payments made for engaging various carriers/lorries for transportation of mobile towers.
It was contended by ld. AR that since there exists no contract between the assessee and the owners of the carrier so hired; no question arises on applicability of section 194C of the Act, 1961.
The issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of coordinate bench in the case of Bhail Bulk Carriers, 50 SOT 622, wherein the Tribunal observed as under :- S.194C(1) applies to any payment made to a person for carrying out any work in pursuance of a contract between contractor and person making payment. Assessee-transporter is not liable to deduct TDS under s.194C(1) for payments made to the outside parties whose vehicles were hired for fulfilling contract when outside tank owners do not had any responsibility or liability towards the fulfillment of contract. If condition of carrying out any work in pursuance of a contract is not fulfilled then provisions of this section will not be applicable at all.
As the facts and circumstances during the year under consideration are exactly similar, respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench, I do not find any merit in the disallowance so made by the AO. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 24/10/2016.
Sd/- (R.C.SHARMA) ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER भुंफई Mumbai; ददनांक Dated 24/10/2016 प्र.कु.मभ/pkm, नन.स/ PS आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीराथी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent. 2. आमकय आमुक्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A), Mumbai. 3. आमकय आमुक्त / CIT 4. आदेशाि सार/ BY ववबागीम प्रनतननधध, आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भुंफई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. ORDER, गार्ा पाईर / Guard file. 6. सत्मावऩत प्रनत //True Copy// उप/सहायक पुंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, भुंफई / ITAT, Mumbai Date Initial 1. Draft dictated on 11-8-16 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 11-8-16 Sr.PS (dictation pad has been enclosed along with this original file) 3. Draft proposed & placed before JM/AM the second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by JM/AM Second Member.
5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/ Sr.PS/PS PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk.
Date of dispatch of Order.