SRI. MALLANGOUDS SANKAGOUDASHANI,HUBLI vs. DCIT, HUBLI
In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed
ITA 259/BANG/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 May 2017AY 2011-12
Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaramanassessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Mallanagouda S. Sankagoudashani, No.222, 2Nd Floor, The Deputy Commissioner Of Bhavani Arcade, Income Tax, Vs. Near Basav Vana, N.C.M., Circle 1(1), Hubli – 580 029. Hubli. Pan: Aeups 7783Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Mallanagouda S. Sankagoudashani, The Assistant Commissioner Of No.222, 2Nd Floor, Income Tax, Bhavani Arcade, Vs. Circle 1(1), Near Basav Vana, N.C.M., Hubli. Hubli – 580 029. Pan: Aeups 7783Q Appellant Respondent
For Appellant: Shri G. Kamaladhar, Standing CounselFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kulkarni, Advocate
40A(3). Thus the CIT(A) has given part relief only to the extent of double disallowance. He has referred to the details of the expenditure and submitted that the assessee has deducted tax at source on Rs. 34,790/- and the payment was made before the due date of filing the return of income. He has pointed out that