REEHAL ROADLINES,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A) 33, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4424/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2016AY 2010-115 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal remanded the issue of interest disallowance to the Assessing Officer for verification. The ad-hoc disallowance from trip expenses was reduced from Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 50,000.

What were the facts?

The assessee is aggrieved by the disallowance of interest paid to an NBFC due to non-deduction of TDS and an ad-hoc disallowance from trip expenses. The Assessing Officer disallowed interest on loans for non-deduction of TDS and made an ad-hoc addition to trip expenses.

What were the issues?

Whether interest paid to an NBFC without TDS deduction is disallowable and the validity of ad-hoc disallowance from trip expenses.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI

Before: Shri Joginder Singh, & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal
For Respondent: Dr. Mukesh Jain CIT-DR
Hearing: 03/05/2016

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 18/06/2014 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai. The first ground raised in the present appeal pertains to confirming the disallowance of interest paid to NBFC on account of non-deduction of TDS u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act).

2.

The crux of argument advanced by Shri Madhur Agarwal, ld. counsel for the assessee, is that loan was repaid by post dated cheque to the person from whom loan was taken. The amount was claimed to be already paid. On the other hand, the ld. DR, Dr. Mukesh Jain, defended the conclusion arrived at in the impugned order.

1.

2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. On perusal of profit & loss account of the assessee, it was found by the Assessing Officer, that the assessee has not deducted TDS on interest paid to the tune of Rs.9,57,369/-, consequently, the same was disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee. It was also observed that the assessee paid a sum of Rs.2,76,000/- on account of cabin making charges for four new vehicles, purchased during the year, without deducting TDS, thus, the depreciation was disallowed.

However, before us, it was explained by the ld. Counsel that the amount had already been paid. Considering the argument of the assessee, this issue is sent to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification and after considering the factual matrix to adjudicate the issue on merit. Thus, this ground of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

3.

Next ground pertains to adhoc disallowance of rupees one lakh out of trip expenses. The total trip expenses, claimed by the assessee firm were explained to be to the tune of Rs.83,79,428/-. It was contended that since it is adhoc disallowance part relief may be granted to the assessee.

However, the ld. DR, defended the conclusion arrived at in the impugned order.

3.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The ld. Assessing Officer made adhoc addition out of trip expenses. The claim of the assessee is that the account of the assessee is audited u/s 44AB, thus, the vouchers are fully verifiable. All the expenses were claimed to be incurred in cash. Considering the adhoc nature of disallowance and the factual matrix that the accounts of the assessee are audited one, the adhoc disallowance of Rs. 1 lakh is reduced to Rs.50,000/-, thus, this ground of the assessee is partly allowed.

Finally, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

This order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of Ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 03/05/2016.

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 →