Samanwaya v. ACIT

BIBHUTI BHUSHAN DAS ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 25(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं/I.T.A No.237/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Bibhuti Bhushan Das Vs. Ito, Ward-25(3), Kolkata. P-42, Block-A, Shatabdi Park, Mukundpur, Kolkata – 700099. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aidpd4689B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 15/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2013-14 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 7, Kolkata’S Order Dated 25.02.2019 Passed In Case No.36/Cit(A)-7/Kol/Ward-25(3)/16-17 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Case Called Twice. None Appears At Assessee’S Behest. Case File Suggests That Rpad Notice Dated 29.11.2019 Stand Returned Unserved. We Therefore Proceed Ex Parte. 2. The Assessee Raises The Following Three Substantive Grounds In The Instant Appeal:

…ithout entering into a valid contract as per the ratio laid down in the Calcutta High Court's decision in the case of Jiauddin Mollah Versus CIT (2016) 385 ITR 0394 (Cal) and the decision of the jurisdictional Tribunal in the case of Samanwaya Vs. ACIT (2009) 34 SOT 332 (Kol) and ACIT vs. Shiva Construction (ITA No.2162 of 2010) this such amount paid to the labour Sardar without any written, valid contractual agreement shall not attract any TDS. Therefore, to sum up, an amount of Rs.7,05,544/- on account of purchase of material and an amount of Rs.25,51,477/- on account of payment to labour Sardars for constructi…

M/S SAMAR & SAMAR,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2010-11 M/S Samar & Samar V/S. Acit, Circle-33 103/B, Beliaghata Main 10, Middleton Row, Road, Kolkata-10 Kolkata [Pan No.Aamfs0210 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A. Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 12-06-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 11-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises Against Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata’S Order 23.01.2015 In Case No.67/Cit(A)-9/Circle-33/2014-15/Kol Upholding Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing / Adding Amount(S) Of ₹16,01,158 @ 10% Of Labour Charges Payments, Interest Of ₹13,26,873/- U/S. 36(1)(Iii), Miscellaneous Cash Purchases Of ₹6,80,842/-, Sales Promotion Expense Of ₹2,34,810/- & Payment Made To Certain Individuals Of ₹3,82,000/-; Respectively In Assessment Order Dated 25.03.2013. 2. We Advert To First Issue Of Estimated Disallowance Amounting To ₹16,01,158/- @ 10% Of The Total Labour Charges Paid Amounting To ₹1,60,11,582/- There Does Not Appear To Be Much Dispute About The Fact That Both The Lower Authorities Have Made The Impugned Disallowance On Account Of Assessee Having Paid This Labour Charges In Cash Without Being Supported

…employment as upheld in the course of lower appellate proceedings. 9. Both parties reiterate their respective pleadings against and in support of impugned disallowance. We notice in this backdrop of facts that a co- ordinate bench in Samanwaya vs. ACIT (2009) 34 SOT 332(Kol) holds that section 194-J of the Act does not apply in case of payment made to for accounting charges. It draws a distinction between this kind of service and the payment made to chartered accountants. We therefore delete the impugned disallowance qua accounting charges of ₹72,000/- in question. Coming to balance component of the impugned disa…

M/S NEW MODERN CONSTRUCTION,BIRBHUM vs. ITO, WD-3, SURI, BIRBHUM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

…ability of deducting tax at source. Before us no other point has been urged not it is said that the aforesaid fact finding is truthful without any basis whatsoever." 7.2. We find that the decision of this tribunal in the case of Samanwaya vs ACIT reported in 34 SOT 332 in ITA No. 484 (Kol) of 2008 dated 23.4.2009 directly supports the case of the assessee wherein it was held that :- 10 M/s. New Modern Construction "We find that in this case, admittedly, the labour sardars in the present case has no locus standi as labour contractor as a labour sardar and a labour contractor are as different as chalk and cheese…

ACIT, CIR-2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN vs. DILIP SAHA, BURDWAN

In the result, the appeal of revenue in ITA No

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before: Shri P.M Jagtap, Accountant Member and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 582/Kol/2014 A.Y 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax……………………………................................... ….. Appellant Circle-2, Burdwan Aaykar Bhawan, Court Compound, Burdwan-713101. -Vs- Dilip Saha PAN:ALOPS2433E Mirchoba, Nutan Colony P.O Sripally Dist-Burdwan-713103.…………….......................................... Respondent AND I.T.A. No. 622/Kol/2014 A.Y 2010-11 Dilip Saha……………………………................................... ……………. Appellant…

INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-33(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KWALITY CONSTRUTION, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

…reliance on the following decisions in support of his contentions :- (a) Order of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Stumm India in ITA No. 127 of 2009 dated 16.8.2010. (b) Decision of this Tribunal in the case of Samanwaya vs ACIT reported in 34 SOT 332 in ITA No. 484 (Kol) of 2008 dated 23.4.2009 . (c ) Decision of this Tribunal in the case of ITO vs Saha Agency in ITA No. 2453/Kol/2013 dated 20.5.2016. (d) Decision of this Tribunal in the case of Seaking Enterprise vs ITO in ITA No. 1670/Kol/2009 dated 26.8.2016. (e) Decision of this Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs Supreme Construction in ITA N…

A.C.I.T CIR - 2,HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY vs. SUPREME CONSTRUCTION, HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2006-07

…2012) 20 taxmann.com 339 where it was held that the provisions of Sec. 194C of the Act are applicable if the payment has been made to a contractor for the year exceeding Rs.20,000/-. Similarly the jurisdictional ITAT, Kolkata in the case of Samanwaya Vs. ACIT 34 SOT 332 has held as under : “Business expenditure—Disallowance under s. 40(a)(ia)—Need for TDS under s. 194C relating to payments made for disbursement of labour charges to labour Sardars—Assessee had specifically stated before the lower authorities that there is no contract between the assessee and the labour Sardars—Revenue authorities could not contro…