Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED&
PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10.04.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XV, Ahmedabad under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) arising out of the order dated 10.01.2013 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (O ), Circle - 9, Ahmedabad for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. During the course of assessment proceeding, it was found that the appellant had paid interest on term loan to Reliance Capital Ltd. for M/s Olympic Transport vs. DCIT Asst.Year –2010-11 Rs.6,41,808/-. Such interest expense was disallowed by the Learned AO on the ground that the appellant had failed to deduct TDS on this interest payment. In appeal, the Learned CIT(A) observed that the appellant did not file any reply or explanation for non-deduction of TDS either to the Learned AO or to the first appellate authority. Before the Learned CIT(A), the appellant only made a contention that it was promised by NBFC that they will provide a certificate of no deduction of TDS but same was not done. However, since no explanation for non-compliance of TDS provision was rendered by the assessee, the disallowance made by the Learned AO to the tune of Rs.6,41,805/- has been justified and upheld by the Learned CIT(A) in the order impugned before us.
At the time of hearing of the instant appeal the Learned Advocate appearing for the assessee submitted before us that the certificate dated 22.05.2014 of accountant under first proviso to sub section (1) of section 201 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for certifying the furnishing of return of income, payment of tax etc. by the payee mentioning the details of payment made by the assessee to the Reliance Capital Ltd. In that view of the matter, it was prayed by the Learned AR to remit the issue to the file of the Learned AO for verification of the contention made by the assessee. However, Learned DR has not practically raised any objection against the submissions made by the Learned AR.
Taking into consideration the entire aspect of the matter, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the issue to the file of the Learned AO to verify the document as mentioned hereinabove in respect of the claim of the assessee and M/s Olympic Transport vs. DCIT Asst.Year –2010-11 to pass orders in accordance with law upon giving an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Thus, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 03/05/2019 ( WASEEM AHMED ) ( Ms. MADHUMITA ROY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 03/05/2019 Priti Yadav, Sr.PS
आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant
""यथ" / The Respondent. 3. संबं"धत आयकर आयु"त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु"त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-XV, Ahmedabad.
"वभागीय ""त"न"ध, आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स"या"पत ""त //// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.