ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 1, CHENNAI V. HI TECH ARAI PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

ITA 1693/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which had deleted the disallowance for belated remittance of TDS by Hi Tech Arai Private Limited for the assessment year 2013-14. The primary issue was whether the TDS on royalty payments, which was deducted and remitted after the due date, should be disallowed. The Assessing Officer initially disallowed the expenditure due to late remittance of TDS, which was contested by the assessee. The CIT(A) had provided relief to the assessee, leading to the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not verified the actual deduction and timely remittance of TDS by the assessee and thus remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for further examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 107433 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 06-06-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Rules, 1962
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: R. VIJAYARAGHAVAN
• Keywords: TDS

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’बी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी अिमताभ शुƑा, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1693/Chny/2024 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai. Vs. Hi Tech Arai Private Limited, No. 33, Sarojini Street, Tallakullam H.O. Madurai, North Madurai 625 002. [PAN: AAACH3917N] (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 08.10.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 13.03.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2013-14. 2. The Appellant-Revenue only effective ground in challenging the action of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance for belated remittance of TDS without verifying whether the actual deduction of tax was done on 25.03.2013 on the impugned royalty payments. I.T.A. No.1693/Chny/24 2 3. At the outset, we note that the Assessing Officer made disallowance of expenditure for which TDS was not remitted within the due date vide para 6 & 6.1 of the assessment order. On perusal of the same, we note that the assessee deducted the amount of ₹.64,95,402/- as TDS for royalty payment for the period of 01.04.2012 to 30.09.2012. The assessee remitted the said TDS amount into Government account on 29.04.2013. According to the Assessing Officer, the said remittance should have been made on or before 7 days from the end of month in which the deduction is made i.e., 07.10.2012. 4. The ld. AR Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate drew our attention to Rule 30(2) of Income Tax Rules, 1962, which is reproduced at page 7 of the assessment order. According to him, the assessee has time upto 30.04.2013. The ld. AR further refers to the details which are at page 4 of the impugned order. He argued the ld. CIT(A), by examining the said details, given relief in favour of the assessee. Further, he argued that it may be remitted to the Assessing Officer for verification of the Assessing Officer as reproduced in page 4 of the impugned order. 5. The ld. DR Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT did not dispute the same. I.T.A. No.1693/Chny/24 3 6. On perusal of page 17 of the impugned order, we note that the ld. CIT(A) found satisfied with the submissions of the assessee that the TDS deducted for the royalty paid from April, 2012 to September, 2012 has due date upto the period 30.04.2013. Since it is not verified by the Assessing Officer, we deem it proper to remit the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for his fresh examination and pass order in accordance with law. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence to substantiate its claim, if any. Thus, the ground raised by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 09th October, 2024 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (AMITABH SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 09.10.2024 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. "