- 1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH D AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JM AND A. K. GAROD IA, AM INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, PALANPUR. VS. RAJMANI TRADERS, PROP. RAMESHCHANDRA M. SHAH MARKET YARD, BHABHAR. (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI A. K. PATEL, DR RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI M. K. PATEL, AR DATE OF HEARING : 30/9/2011. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : /10/2011 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 6.4.2011 FOR ASST. YEAR 2008-09. 2. GROUND BY THE REVENUE IS AS UNDER :- (1) THE LD. CIT(A)-XX, AHMEDABAD HAS ERRED IN LAW AND O N FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.15,49,350/- MADE BY THE AO U/S 40(A)(IA) ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST PAID WITHOUT DEDUC TING TAX. 3. THE LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHEREA S THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LD . CIT(A). ITA NO.1602/AHD/2011 ASST. YEAR :2008-09 ITA NO.1602/AHD/2011 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 2 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. W E FIND THAT THE DISALLOWANCE U/S 40(A)(IA) WAS MADE BY THE AO ON TH E BASIS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEDUCTED TAX FROM THE AMOUNT OF IN TEREST PAID AND HENCE INTEREST IS NOT ALLOWABLE AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40(A)(IA). THE DISALLOWANCE WAS DELETED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE B ASIS THAT ASSESSEE WAS NOT REQUIRED TO DEDUCT TDS UNDER SECTION 194A BECAU SE THE GROSS RECEIPTS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT YEAR AND PRECEDING Y EAR WERE BELOW RS.40 LACS. THE RELEVANT PARA OF THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IS REPRODUCED BELOW :- 3.3 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AR AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CAREFULLY. IT IS SEEN THAT THE GROSS RECEIPTS OF THE APPELLANT DURING ASST. YEAR 2008-09 ARE ONLY RS.39,64,754/- AND THE GROSS RECEIPTS IN ASST. YEAR 2007-08 WERE RS.15,85,058/-. THUS AS PER THE P ROVISO TO SECTION 194A OF THE IT ACT, 1961 THE APPELLANT WAS NOT REQU IRED TO DEDUCT TDS FROM THE INTEREST PAYMENTS MADE BY HIM BECAUSE HIS TURNOVER OR GROSS RECEIPTS DID NOT EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFI ED IN SECTION 44AB IN THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING FINANCIAL YEAR. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MA KING THE ADDITION U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE IT ACT, 1961. THE ADD ITION MADE BY THE AO IS HENCE DELETED. 5. NO MISTAKE HAS BEEN POINTED OUT BY THE REVENUE I N THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) BY SHOWING THAT THE PROVISO TO SECTION 194A IS NOT APPLICABLE BY SHOWING THAT THE GROSS RECEIPTS IN ASST. YEAR UNDER APPEAL OR THE PRECEDING YEAR WAS MORE THAN RS.40 LACS AND HENCE W E DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). WE DECLINE TO INTERFERE. ITA NO.1602/AHD/2011 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 14/10/2011 SD/- SD/- (MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT) (A. K. GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD, MAHATA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE REVENUE. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1.DATE OF DICTATION 4/10/2010. 2.DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER.OTHER MEMBER 12/10/2011 3.DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S./P.S. 4.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT.. 5.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR .P.S./P.S 6.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 7.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8.THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSTT. REG ISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER 9.DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER..