ANKIT GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the appeal to the Assessing Officer (AO) to verify if the payees had paid their taxes and filed their returns. The AO was directed to re-adjudicate the matter based on this verification.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed an addition of Rs. 10,48,856/- made under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee argued that the payees had paid their taxes.
What were the issues?
Whether the addition under Section 40(a)(ia) is sustainable when the payees have discharged their tax liability.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : SMC-II : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY
ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-XXII, New Delhi, dated 30.9.2014 for assessment year 2010-11.
The sole ground that is argued before us is Ground No.2, which reads as follows:-
“2. That on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs.10,48,856/- under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).”
The ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the ‘A’ Bench of the Tribunal in in the case Ansal Landmark Township (P) Ltd., vide order dated 22.7.2014 and submits that the payees in this case have paid the taxes and the issue may be set aside to the file of the AO for the limited purpose of verifying whether the payees had paid their taxes and, thereafter, filed their return of income within the stipulated time. In reply, the ld. DR though not leaving his ground, submitted that the AO may verify this claim of the assessee.
Under these circumstances, I set aside this appeal to the file of the AO with a direction to verify the claim of the assessee as to whether the payees in this case have paid their taxes and filed their returns of income.
The assessee reserves the right to raise all other issues relating to this matter before the ld. AO. With these observations, I set aside this appeal of the assessee to the file of the AO for verifying as to whether the payees in this case have paid their taxes and filed their respective return of incomes and to dispose of the case denovo in accordance with law. The assessee is free to raise all contentions before the AO.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order pronounced in the open court on 04.11.2015.
More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)
- Rekha Agarwal, Jaipur vs ITO WD 4(1), JaipurITA 844/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Cdg Petchem Limited, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward - 1(1), HyderabadITA 1900/HYD/2025[2018-2019]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-2019
- M/S. Shree Laminators Ltd., Kolkata vs DCIT, Circle 4(4), KolkataITA 1534/KOL/2026[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-2012
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026